Alliance Fanatic

I think hope that the PC's are done politically. I thought that they would make an effort to join in a united right wing party. However they, seem to be headed down the path of destruction. I am hoping that the next election will bring about something new. I think that the Alliance will be able to win, or gain some more seats based on the following. -Paul Martin cannot react to criticism, he has been hiding out politically, the Alliance could capitalize on this, and we may see a moment like in the 84 election were Mulroney was able to become PM. - Tories seem to be to close to the Liberals, they have always indicated their preference for Jean Chretien, Paul Martin, and Svend Robinson [scumbags] over more honorable men like Preston Manning, Stockwell Day, and Stephen Harper. -Mackay is a poor leader, and brought about one of the most boring convention speeches in the history of politics. Harper can empower a crowd with his speeches. My prediction LIB-150+ CA-65+ BQ-20+ NDP-5+ PC-0 [hopefully]

Neal, what I meant was that the Alliancewould allow the public to decide on social issues. The vast majority of Alliance MP's are opposed to abortion, and would probably vote against abortion in a referendum. The alliance would also make sure that no tax dollars are funding abortion. As for that poll I put in, it was stupid to do, because they asked only about 250 Alliance members who they would vote for in the US.

Actually that was a pretty obscure poll, It was an internet poll, it was stupid to put that in their. I think that the majority of Alliance MP's are pro-life, but would prefer the people to decide whether abortion is legal or not in a referendum.

United right eyes Harris for leader Alliance, Tories near deal to create new party Sean Gordon The Ottawa Citizen Friday, September 26, 2003 CREDIT: Ted Rhodes, CanWest News Service (Calgary Herald) Mike Harris last night addressed speculation that he would pursue the leadership of a united right. Speaking in Banff, he said: "I don't think we should be getting ahead of ourselves but I for one would be prepared to make a contribution and then we'll have to see where it goes." ADVERTISEMENT Emissaries from the Canadian Alliance and Progressive Conservatives have reached an agreement in principle to found a new party, and it now appears a movement is afoot to install former Ontario premier Mike Harris as leader. Organizers from the federal and Ontario Conservative parties confirmed that Harris supporters have been quietly laying the groundwork for a run at leading a united right once a deal is reached to dissolve the Alliance and Tories and found a new party. And that agreement may now be at hand. In Ottawa, Alliance leader Stephen Harper said he expects to receive a compromise proposal from his representatives and the Tory emissaries "before the end of the week." "My understanding is there is an agreement in principle, it's a matter of our representatives coming to finalizing that effort," he said. "I'll make a decision shortly after I get the final conclusions of the discussions ... to get an agreement both sides eventually have to make their decisions to sign off, and I don't know what the Tory timeline is on that." Conservative leader Peter MacKay struck a far less strident tone than on Wednesday, when he blasted the Alliance for purportedly leaking details of the negotiations to the press "I can tell you the emissaries are doing great work ... I'm confident in the emissary process, I'm confident in the people I have representing me at that table, and we're going to take a very strong and serious look at this," he said. Mr. Harper doesn't anticipate any further talks, and suggested a meeting scheduled for next week between the emissaries -- former federal finance minister Don Mazankowski, ex-Ontario premier Bill Davis, and Conservative MP Loyola Hearn for the Tories, ex-Reform MP Ray Speaker, Senator Gerry St-Germain and MP Scott Reid for the Alliance -- will simply formalize the agreement. "I don't think the public wants an endless soap opera, there's been some good discussions over the three months, I think most of the issues have been thoroughly addressed," he said. Mr. Harper said. "It's time for the parties to make their positions known and take their decisions," Mr. Harper said. If the two parties are able to reach an agreement, it will first be presented to their respective caucuses, then submitted to the general membership. Mr. Harper said it would then take three or four weeks "to get some details out to them and get some mechanism whereby they can send back their support or opposition". It's then hoped a new leader could be in place either late this year or early in 2004. But before any of that happens, Mr. MacKay has to get his caucus on side. "Are people nervous about it? Are they concerned? By all means, this is their livelihood ... clearly I'm going to need caucus support for this. And so this is a (multi-tier) process that's got to be in place before we're going to be able to proceed," Mr. MacKay said. While both leaders are preoccupied with stickhandling a deal, the buzz surrounding a Harris candidacy is intensifying. The former Ontario premier was in Ottawa on Wednesday night, and, after being sighted by a journalist, said he is "not disinterested" in making the leap into federal politics. A former adviser said Mr. Harris doesn't want to sour the unite-the-right discussions by leaping into the fray too soon, and that he has limited interest in getting involved until the process for merging the parties is under way. The unite-the-right negotiations have become the hot topic among Tories across the country, and Mr. Harris is likely to fuel more speculation when he plays golf with Alberta Premier Ralph Klein today. Mr. Harris gave a speech in Banff at the Global Economic Forum last night, and was to meet with Mr. Klein afterward. Speaking to reporters earlier in the day, Mr. Klein came out in support of the principle of consolidating Canada's right-of-centre political parties, and suggested Mr. Harris would be a good choice to lead the new entity. "The Klein-Harris axis is pretty well known, and given what's happened in Ontario lately, I think Mike knows he can't go it alone, he needs allies in other parts of the country," said an Ontario Tory close to Mr. Harris. With the Ontario Tory election campaign floundering, many of the same people who were urging Mr. Harris to run for the federal Tory leadership earlier this year have renewed contact and turned their energies toward having him enter the race to lead the new party. Alliance officials said it will indeed be a race, and that Mr. Harper would run, despite rumours in many Tory circles that he isn't keen on staying in Ottawa. Factions within the Alliance and the federal Tories are lukewarm to Mr. Harris, and some privately doubt he's ripe for a transition to the federal scene. But at the same time, the perception that an outside candidate is needed to galvanize the new party appears to be gaining steam in Tory circles. "Whenever you have a candidate of that calibre, it gives you the chance to avoid the perception that either Harper or MacKay have won out over the other. And Mike Harris would be a great choice," said one New Brunswick Tory.

Actually, Rob, Canada was once one of the most conservative, right wing countries, in the world. We were more conservative than the US before 1963. Canada was built on these basic founding principles. -Free Markets -Individual Liberty -Strony Military, Proud History -Strong Families make a stronger country -Sanctity of life. Over 100,000 men died fighting for those principles in world war 1, and world war 2. Men in world war 2 made damn sure that those principles were safegaurded after seeing the abuse of human life in Europe, and those same men who fought, fought against injustices. The same happened in the US. -Canada also shunned the new deal of FDR. The Canada which you know is Trudeau's Canada, Trudeau considered Canada as bad as nazi Germany, and Trudeau mocked jews who went to fight for this country in world war 2. Trudeau made his vision of Canada in the 1970's, and 1980's. So dont try to get me to believe this "canada was always progressive" crap. The Alliance is not extremist, on Abortion, the vast majority of Alliance member's believe it should be allowed, but not covered under medicare. Alliance member's were asked in a poll, which American party they prefered, and the majority supported the Democract's.

Gugsy, Mulroney was a success!!! Mulroney was an extremely bad prime minister, and he failed conservatives in this country. Mulroney seemed to support social liberalism, which brought about the 500,000,000,000+ debt. Mulroney also supported many feminist groups, and gun control groups, which resulted in the creation on the Reform party. -It was good that mulroney was a failure, the Reform party was then able to effect public policy more thoroughly, and bring in debt reduction, tax relief, and spending controls.

I'm voting Mike Harris.

Here's my listing of leaders for a united right. Leaders I would support A+-Mike Harris A -Stephen Harper B -Stockwell Day B -Benard Lord B -Mario Dumont Leaders I would not support -Scott Brison -Greg Thompson -Ernie Eves -David Orchard

Yes sexual preferences are no different from race, sure sexual behavior is kind of like race, but, oh yeah Siriff cant make a good point and is babbling on. To compare homosexuality to the civil rights movement of Martin Luther King Jr is stupid, King believed that homosexuality was immoral, and believed that American law, and values should be centered on Judeo-Christian values. Unless King is a bigot.

I voted Libertarian, the PC party has moved to far to the centre in recent years.

Heres the websites for each party. [a] Freedom Party www.freedomparty.on.ca/home.htm Libertarian Party [http://www.libertarian.on.ca/] [c] ND's [http://www.publicpower.ca/index.htm] [d] Liberals [http://www.ontarioliberal.com/en/] ProgressiveConservatives [www.ontariopc.com/] [f] Family Coalition Party http://www.familyparty.on.ca/ [g] Green Party http://www.greenparty.on.ca/

GR is green party. Secondly the only people who will decide whether to merger or not is the PC's, Alliance members have already made up thier minds and want a merger. PC's still have to make a decision, I hope the PC members apply some pressure in order to get a merger going.

Which poll pegged the Alliance at 13%, and the Tories at 19%. The only three polls which are really worth looking at are ipsos-reid, compass, and environics. EKOS is simply a CBC sponsored leftist poll which is always out of step with the public. SES is more supportive of PC's. It does not matter what the polls say as of now, what matters is what happens during an election. I dont think Mackay will do well he keeps on flip flopping. I know the CBC will do everything to demonize the Alliance, they did a pretty negative special on Stephen Harper. Its hard to say what could happen. I'd say if their was no united right it would probably look like this. PC's-20% -no real gains CA- 20% -no eastern breakthrough LIB's-45% BQ-5% NDP-5% Most people will realize Jack Layton is a major league A-hole. With a United Right an election could look like this CO-45% LIB-35% BQ-5% NDP-5% GR-10%

I sure hope a merger comes about, then all this bemoaning and attacking will stop, then the majority of us will instead be sniping for liberal's instead of each other. -Pellaken has obviously went back to the NDP, I thought he decided to join up with the PC's or Alliance. -Some Tories might leave, 2or 3 MP's may leave if their is a united right, however most of them belong in the NDP, or Liberals. -I predict that a united right wing could win seats 9 out of 10 provinces, and capture at least 30%-45% of the right wing vote in Canada. -If the Alliance abondones the principles of free markets, individual liberty, and democratic reforms. A second Reform party would come about. Alliance, PC linkup nearer to reality Many divisions remain among Conservatives Sean Gordon and Bill Curry The Ottawa Citizen Friday, September 19, 2003 ADVERTISEMENT Despite the emergence of deep divisions within the Progressive Conservative caucus, one of the architects of a proposal to merge the country's two right-wing parties says they've never been closer to achieving that goal. Former Reform Party MP Ray Speaker, one of the six political insiders given the task of hammering out a deal between the Canadian Alliance and the Tories, said the parties have made headway on a number of fronts since talks started more than a month ago. "I'm optimistic. This is the first time I've felt an element of confidence that the possibility is there for us to achieve," said Mr. Speaker, a former Alberta MP and a Reform Party founder. Tory insiders, meanwhile, still rate the chances of reaching an agreement at less than 50-50. But despite efforts from both sides to publicly play down the nature of the talks, it appears they are at an advanced stage. Confronted by leaked reports that dragged the previously private discussions into the public, the Tories held a special caucus meeting in Ottawa yesterday that one attendee described as "very frank and animated." Several MPs were furious the details of the merger proposal had been made public, and after the meeting Conservative leader Peter MacKay said that while he wants to make "a genuine, concerted effort," he wouldn't be bullied into a deal. "There will be no shotgun wedding, there will be no intimidation. ... I'm cautious about this, I'm looking for the best possible scenario that is going to present Canadians with an alternative, and at the end of the day it may be us," he said. Discussions are continuing among representatives from both parties, who are working on a plan to consolidate the Tories and Alliance into a single party. The basis of that discussion is a 40-page document prepared by the Alliance that highlights 14 major points concerning the selection of a leader, of candidates and policy development. Both parties have had input in modifying the various aspects of the proposal, although Mr. Speaker wouldn't discuss the changes. He did say the timeline for setting up the new party is "really tight right now," and added it's hoped the new party and the new leader would be in place early next year. Whatever deal is reached, there will be obstacles within the Tory caucus, which Mr. MacKay acknowledged will have to be dealt with. Mr. MacKay's caucus met in a Senate committee room yesterday just across the street from Parliament Hill, and while several MPs were tight-lipped when they emerged, New Brunswick Tory MP Greg Thompson, who left the meeting early, wasn't. "Some of the differences between the Canadian Alliance party and ours are differences I'm not sure can ever be resolved," he said. "I have no intention of running as a small 'c' conservative under Stephen Harper or anyone else." Mr. Thompson blamed the leaks on the Alliance and suggested they could bring the talks to a halt. Mr. Speaker, however, said the talks were scheduled to resume, but wouldn't specify when. While there is considerable tension within the Tory caucus, Mr. Speaker said the Alliance representatives and their Tory counterparts, former deputy prime minister Don Mazankowski, former Ontario premier Bill Davis and current Newfoundland MP Loyola Hearn, understand the importance of joining forces. "The participants have been very positive and very frank. ... There's a feeling that we're going to have a better opportunity than we've had in a long time to fight this government," Mr. Speaker said. Both Speaker and Hearn said the current process differs in important ways from previous failed attempts to unite the right. "It's not the same thing. ... Usually, before, it was something thrown about publicly which the press more or less negotiated between the leaders etc. Here you have more or less independent people exploring all possibilities," said Hearn. "I don't think the trust or the sincere desire, perhaps, to really do something was there on either side. I believe it is this time."

Pellaken it is not social engineering to believe that marriage is simply between a man and a woman. Gay marriage has nothing to do with human rights, I am personally getting sick of people complaining about how their sexual preferences are human rights, gays want to socially re-engineer the country, they try to restrict religion, and freedom of speech. I have a few questions for you. 1. If sexual preferences are considered human rights, then you have no problem with pedophilia, incest, or bestiality, the reason why we have laws against these cases are because it was recognized by or moral code, that these behaviors were unhealthy. Homosexuality was given an exception due to the fact it was two adults doing, and according to the Altlanta Center for Disease Control, homosexuality can lead to death. But in essence homosexuality is not different from incest, pedophilia, or bestiality, all were once considered taboo. However pedophilia is now becoming tolerated, the first people to celebrate the idea of pedophilia as art were egale. Egale also supports lowering the age of consent. 2. I believe that homosexuals have the right to do whatever they wanna do behind close doors, "but they should shut up about it, and stop parading about". It has also been shown that whenever gay activists go up against the church, gays ultimately win. In Vancouver gay rights activists burned a cross on the steps of a catholic church, and I believe one christmas, or easter, gays went along a route catholics were taking and mocked them for their beliefs. -that is true, strangely if christians did that to homosexuals it would be the hate crime of the century. 3. I have a relative who is gay, and will not be able to live past his 35th birthday due to the fact he has AIDS.

I sure hope a merger happens, simply so that their wont be anymore infantile name calling, and conservatives may be united in order to beat Paul Martin. However, I will leave a new conservative party, if it turns out to simply be blue liberals, who have more in common with Joe Clark, Scott Brison, Paul Martin, and Jean Chretien, than Stephen Harper, or Mike Harris. Then I will simply join a different party. Mackay's position always seem to change on the merger issue, I'm hoping that he will see the light, but he flip flops alot. The Alliance supports a merger, the Alliance has been the only driving force behind a merger, the alliance will support a merger, however it is up to the tories whether or not a merger happens. If the tories slam the door on the Alliance, then hopefully they'll get wiped out next election, and the Alliance becomes a credible alternative. Dont use polls to say the tories are better than the Alliance, show which policies are better than the Alliance's.

I support the merger, sure sometimes PC'ers tend to piss me off, but overall their kind of conservative. However Gugsy should remember that it has been the Alliance who has actaully been trying to unite the right, and the PC's are the ones who are continuing to split the vote. Hopefully their will be a merger, and maybe Mike Harris, or Stephen Harper could become leader, but if a red tory wins who will bring about a blue liberal government, then I will take my support elsewhere. Maybe libertarian, freedon party, or a newly formed party.

Unfortunately gay marriage is here to stay, in a country where their was a warm loving family, with a mother and a father, their are now a lump of meaningless mechanized relationship, with no warmth, were it lust is more important than warmth. I guess, the NDP'ers, Libs, and PC'ers, all support gay marriage. But why do you continue to say that churches and christians are'nt at risk due to gay rights, they are!!! -One man in BC who sent letters blasting the provinces pro-gay cirriculum lost his job, and also was denied free speech, schools now feature magazines relating to anal pleasure and the like. -One gay activist said this of gay rights, "Gay rights will be a battle between freedom of religion and gay rights" -Gays hate christians, and anybody who opposes their agenda. -the Gay lobby will stop at nothing to destroy the christian church, PC MP gloated about how Canada is a better nation due to the fact that their are not as many christians as there once were. -Gays have successfully labelled the bible hate literature in Saskatchewan. -Egale supports lowering the age of consent below 14, to help children develop sexual relationships, that used to be considered child abuse, but no more. -Not all gays support destroying freedom of religion, but people in egale, and the ndp do. So before you all go out supporting gay marriage, consider what may happen to our moral compass. Everything about our society has been turned upside down by social liberalism. Progress is now considered Abortion on demand- 100,000 deaths per year Divorce- 50% divorce rate Sexual abuse on the rise Destroying freedom of speech, and religion in favor of political correctness.

Is'nt it interesting that the PC'ers here are mad about the vote, making gay marriage legal, yet if it was'nt for the PC's marriage would still be its traditional meaning. The PC's continue to startle me with some of their antics 1. Supporting gay marriage, and undermining the democratic process, once again believing that the courts deserve more power than the democratically elected representatives. 2. Supporting Svend Robinson's bill, which will label the bible as hate literature, and force churches to become politically correct, and not attack the homosexual lifestyle. This is why the PC's should not, and cant win power, they are almost like wannabe liberals, while the Canadian Alliance is once again the only party which supports democracy and liberty. I dont know, maybe the east considers democracy and liberty as "redneck", or think that democracy and liberty are to "american"

By the way, would you support this party, if it was the conservative alternative to the Republicans http://www.americafirstparty.org

I am voting for Pat Buchanan, he represents the true conservatism. He supports a republic, not an empire, is for limited immigration, and supports individual freedom. www.theamericancause.org

I am afraid this is what has happened to conservatism in the past 3 years, it has been taken over by the neo-conservative element, this is what happened in the US. What Happened to Conservatives? The so-called conservative movement of the last 20 years, starting with the Reagan revolution of the 1980s, followed by the 1994 Gingrich takeover of the House, and culminating in the early 2000s with Republican control of both Congress and the White House, seems a terrible failure today. Republicans have failed utterly to shrink the size of government; instead it is bigger and costlier than ever before. Federal spending spirals out of control, new Great Society social welfare programs have been created, and the national debt is rising by more than a half-trillion dollars per year. Whatever happened to the conservative vision supposedly sweeping the nation? One thing is certain: those who worked and voted for less government, the very foot soldiers in the conservative revolution, have been deceived. Today, the ideal of limited government has been abandoned by the GOP, and real conservatives find their views no longer matter. True limited government conservatives have been co-opted by the rise of the neoconservatives in Washington. The neoconservatives- a name they gave themselves- are largely hardworking, talented people who have worked their way into positions of power in Washington. Their views dominate American domestic and foreign policy today, as their ranks include many of the President’s closest advisors. They have successfully moved the Republican party away from the Goldwater-era platform of frugal government at home and nonintervention abroad, toward a big-government, world empire mentality more reminiscent of Herbert Hoover or Woodrow Wilson. In doing so, they have proven that their ideas are neither new nor conservative. Modern neoconservatives are not necessarily monolithic in their views, but they generally can be described as follows: -They agree with Trotsky’s idea of a permanent revolution; -They identify strongly with the writings of Leo Strauss; -They express no opposition to the welfare state, and will expand it to win votes and power; -They believe in a powerful federal government; -They believe the ends justify the means in politics- that hardball politics is a moral necessity; -They believe lying is necessary for the state to survive; -They believe certain facts should be known only by the political elite, and withheld from the general public; -They believe in preemptive war and the naked use of military force to achieve any desired ends; -They openly endorse the idea of an American empire, and hence unapologetically call for imperialism; -They are very willing to use force to impose American ideals; -They scoff at the Founding Father’s belief in neutrality in foreign affairs; -They believe 9/11 resulted from a lack of foreign entanglements, not from too many; -They are willing to redraw the map of the Middle East by force, while unconditionally supporting Israel and the Likud Party; -They view civil liberties with suspicion, as unnecessary restrictions on the federal government; -They despise libertarians, and dismiss any arguments based on constitutional grounds. Those who love liberty, oppose unjustified war, and resent big-brother government must identify the philosophy that is influencing policy today. If the neoconservatives are wrong- and I believe they are- we must demonstrate this to the American people, and offer an alternative philosophy that is both morally superior and produces better results in terms of liberty and prosperity. It is time for true conservatives to retake the conservative movement.

What policies do the PC's have which are better than the Canadian Alliance policies. All the tories ever do is sit on the fence. Gugsy go to the Alliance website, and find policies which you believe are regional or extremist. Secondly the PC party does not believe in democracy, Joe Clark in the last election attacked the Alliance, for the belief that Canadians deserve a voice in social policy. Joe also joined in the name calling, saying that Stockwell Day, and the Alliance had an hidden agenda, because alot of Alliance members are religous.

So Gugsy you only joined the PC's so you might be on the winning side, you can find nothing good about the policies of the pc party, since PC's dont take a stance on anything. I am glad that 37% of people hate the Alliance, because that 37% are the same people who voted for Trudeau, love the welfare state, support the criminilization of religion, support gay marriage, and laws limiting free speech. 37% of the country hates the Alliance, because the Alliance actually have principles, and are prepared to stand up for principles, and will not sell out just to get into power. The Alliance wants to change the system, not become part of it. The PC's should join up with Paul Martin, they believe in the same thing. Social Liberalism, the Welfare State, and statism. While the Alliance believes in individual liberty, free markets, the family, and strong communities, those are the values Canadians died fighting for in 1914-1918, and 1939-1945, and those are the principles the Alliance is fighting for in 2003.

I am also considering moving to the United States, at my job, I meet alot of American's, and the majority of them are kind, and "not" arrogant. I am going to give Canada till 2008 to make a change, if either the left wing liberals or PC's get government, then I am moving to the United States, or joining a seperatist party. I hate the Canada I am living in now, this Canada is not the same Canada 100,000 men died for, they fought against brutal tyrants, in favor of individual liberty, free enterprise, and traditional values, all where of these values where corrupted by Pierre Trudeau who considered this country as bad a nazi germany.