Sneaky Conservatism

[guyser]

How? Provide some semblance of proof to back up your assertion. A well-disciplined caucus and cabinet does not mean the goverment is closed and inaccessible. Again, you are providing nothing but empty rhetoric.

How are they with the media? Accessible? ...or are they "spinning it " Did they attend the media dinner, the one the sitting PM always went too?

All they are doing is respecting the laws of another democracy. Trying to spin that as a 'socon' agenda is as weak as the "Guns in our streets" ads.

Start with one.

True, they are respecting the laws. So did every other govt in this land.

What they changed was any attempt to persuade the local govt in choosing another sentence, with respect to the local laws.

But you knew that. You just wanted to spin it differently.

[Lazarus]

Most interesting! I had a post in another thread stating how I am an old Reformer and think completely the opposite. The new CP seems to be a clone of the old Mulroney/Campell party, the one I bailed on nearly 20 years ago!

I completely disagree that Harper is a fundamentalist religious conservative. I still remember how in the early days of the Reform party Harper gave a speech telling all the bible thumpers that if they thought they could mix their fundamentalist views on gays and abortion with the platforms of the party they would take it down to a disastrous electoral defeat!

Stockwell Day should have listened to him and then Warren Kinsella wouldn't have been able to stop his campaign dead in its tracts with the "Barney the Dinosaur" joke!

So I can't agree with you on this one.

It's Harper's rigid party solidarity and total abandonment of grassroots populism that makes me think the old PC rump is now in control.

As I've said before, I'll vote for the new CP for lack of an alternative but if another Manning ever comes out of the wilderness I'll be gone like a shot!

Interesting, we both have come to the same basic conclusion of Harper and Conservatives, but for differing reason and different angles. That doesn't bode well for their chances come the next election if both our factions turn our collective backs on them does it?

The problem with populist parties and leaders is that their base is too narrow to win enough support to form the Government. Peston Manning's Reform Party was a good example of that, their entire base was centred mainly in Alberta with a sprinkling of support from the other Prairie Provinces and BC.

I remember watching the disastrous and I hate to say it, well deserved results of the '93 election while attending a media night school course. When Manning came up to speak to his supporters and the camera's panned across the crowd, I was struck by the homogeneity of his supporters. Basically, all white, middle to late aged, and male with a solid corp from the Blue Rinse set sprinkled in. I couldn't help but think to myself that with such a narrow base and a lack of appeal to younger people, ethnic minorities, first nations people and easterns, there was no way the Reformers would even form a Government and basically have handed Canada to the Liberals for at least 10 or more years. The Federal NDP suffers from the same problem, they have a too narrow base to form the next Government.

I figure that the next election will result in a Liberal minority, especially since Harper has done a lot to annoy his base, what with his autocratic style ala Jean Chrétien, muzzling of his MP's, pandering to Quebec and the Bloc, and not to mention his taxing of income trusts. I figure Stephen Dion will get the nod, if only because he will be seen to be basically a safe and harmless caretaker for the short term.

[guyser]

Provide some semblance of proof to back up your assertion. A well-disciplined caucus and cabinet does not mean the goverment is closed and inaccessible. Again, you are providing nothing but empty rhetoric.

How about this from today?

"It is great news for Canada to be part of this partnership," Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunn told the Commons on Friday.

But Lunn then refused to meet with reporters to discuss the matter, staying in a private Commons lobby for more than an hour while media waited outside.

Yup, wouldn't anyone think this means accessible?

[jdobbin]

How about this from today?

Yup, wouldn't anyone think this means accessible?

Isn't it funny to have a perfect example on the same day that someone names outlandish statements? heh

[Wild Bill]

The problem with populist parties and leaders is that their base is too narrow to win enough support to form the Government. Peston Manning's Reform Party was a good example of that, their entire base was centred mainly in Alberta with a sprinkling of support from the other Prairie Provinces and BC.

I remember watching the disastrous and I hate to say it, well deserved results of the '93 election while attending a media night school course. When Manning came up to speak to his supporters and the camera's panned across the crowd, I was struck by the homogeneity of his supporters. Basically, all white, middle to late aged, and male with a solid corp from the Blue Rinse set sprinkled in. I couldn't help but think to myself that with such a narrow base and a lack of appeal to younger people, ethnic minorities, first nations people and easterns, there was no way the Reformers would even form a Government and basically have handed Canada to the Liberals for at least 10 or more years. The Federal NDP suffers from the same problem, they have a too narrow base to form the next Government.

I figure that the next election will result in a Liberal minority, especially since Harper has done a lot to annoy his base, what with his autocratic style ala Jean Chrétien, muzzling of his MP's, pandering to Quebec and the Bloc, and not to mention his taxing of income trusts. I figure Stephen Dion will get the nod, if only because he will be seen to be basically a safe and harmless caretaker for the short term.

How do you come to that conclusion? I may be disenchanted with Harper but I don't see any other alternative so unless a miracle happens I WILL vote for him! How likely is it that a conservatively inclined voter would choose Liberal or NDP? Particularly with the record so far of Stephane Dion? And what about the CP rising in Quebec and the Liberals down there at par with lawyers and used car salesmen?

No, far more likely that Harper will keep his base, if only by default.

I fear he and his advisers may be making the same mistake that Mulroney's crew did all those years ago. They shamelessly took the party grassroots members for granted, keeping them busy with non-binding party policy platforms. They fully expected them to show up to put up campaign signs, of course! And to donate money!

There was even a term coined at the time: "disenfranchised conservative", meaning one who had no real desired candidate at the polls and was left with the least of all evils.

This was one of the strongest cards put into Manning's hand by the old Tory gang. The Tories seemed just too blissfully arrogant to understand that the world had changed. Any salesman knows that you can be successful rigging your customer's choices only as long as he has no alternative. He may keep buying your product but he's likely fully aware of what you've done to him and he will hate you for it! As soon as an attractive alternative is offered him you've lost him for generations, which is exactly what happened, as we all well know.

As for Reform's demographics in its supporters, I beg to disagree! Reform polled over a million votes in Ontario. That's not too shabby for a brand new party! To come from nowhere to the Loyal Opposition that quickly cannot be dismissed. Many of us felt that the party was being too impatient. It seemed that we were always growing even if not that quickly in some areas. The old Tories held the Maritimes but we were seeing modest growth even in those provinces.

I mean, just how fast was a new party EXPECTED to win power?

As for the blue-haired white bread membership, I can't speak for anywhere but my own riding and I can say from direct experience that we had nothing like that! Lots of visible minorities and young folks!

I still remember that election night when I was volunteering as a scrutineer at a polling station. The Liberals paid their scrutineers and they were easy to recognise. They wore suits and frankly looked either like mafioso or young company MBA's from a global corporation. We Reformers were unpaid volunteers and more salt of the earth in our wardrobe but we not only had a scrutineer at every polling station, we had a volunteer for every single polling box at every station! The Liberal guys were obviously kinda shocked!

Still, I actually wound up feeling sorry for the Tory scrutineer when the time came for the ballots to be counted. The Liberal guy and I got along famously, considering each other more rivals than enemies. The Tory refused to be friendly with us. As the votes were tallied however his face started to go sheet white in shock! For the first half of the count Reform was in the lead but as we passed the halfway mark the Liberal candidate was clearly going to win. The NDP got their usual handful but the poor Tory...his man got fewer votes than that of the Yogic Flyer!

This from a riding that had elected a Tory in Mulroney's first majority!

So obviously my experience was quite different than yours, certainly due to geographic location. However, many of us were sure that if we just gave it another election or two we'd make it on our own!

We'll never know, I guess.

[myata]

You are saying nothing about Kyoto. Prove my memory false.

Harper promised to not scrap Kyoto - and he all but did through the back door.

. A well-disciplined caucus and cabinet does not mean the goverment is closed and inaccessible. Again, you are providing nothing but empty rhetoric.

"Caucus" that refuses to answer any questions - avoids public debate as open fire - talks through dumb witted attack ads instead - releases important decisions with no discussion on Friday night - does not respect media - shows contempt for democratic process - that should suffice for now? (I recall something about both media and access to information commissioner rating this government as one of the worst in the recent history but won't claim it without some further research yet).

All they are doing is respecting the laws of another democracy.

Oh that very special democracy. And in favour of our own laws. Bypassing clear will of majority of Canadians, and democratic process at the same time. That's our sneaky con boys! How smart! And how sneaky!

Edited December 1, 2007 by myata

[myata]

More on sneaky cons transparency right from this morning's CBC report: Stockwell Day postponed implementation of policy requiring marking imported guns. Against recommendations of police and indefinetly. Needless to mention it was buried somewhere in the depths of the privy council web site, no discussion, debate held. And "no comments" from Day either.

Details here: Globe & Mail story. Some indications are that gun lobby may have been involved.

Let's see: pumping hysteria about non-existing crime problem; while quietly doing away with useful tools that actually help police deal with real crimes (gun registry; imported gun markings). Sounds familiar already?

[Michael Bluth]

Harper promised to not scrap Kyoto - and he all but did through the back door.

When did Harper ever promise not to scrap Kyoto? Your memory is false. Convenenient, as that is the only way your diatribe makes any sense.

(I recall something about both media and access to information commissioner rating this government as one of the worst in the recent history but won't claim it without some further research yet).

Why? You haven't done any research on any of your other histrionic claims. What makes this one special?

[Fortunata]

Both the environment Minions have denied turning their backs on Kyoto; they say that while they turn their backs on any meaningful climate change action. They have to say this as Parliament voted to keep Kyoto. The best they can do is say that the targets are unmeetable (which they now are).

Openness, transparency and accountability are buzzwords the HarperCons-ervatives throw around but they do not really know what they mean. It's all a smoke screen like so much else. Slight of hand artists.

[noahbody]

Let's see: pumping hysteria about non-existing crime problem; while quietly doing away with useful tools that actually help police deal with real crimes (gun registry; imported gun markings). Sounds familiar already?

From your link:

Mr. Mauser said he does not see the value in the firearms-marking regulations, since any import stamp will simply duplicate information already contained in the serial number. He said he believes the chief effect of the new rules will be to drive up the cost of imported firearms, and limit the availability of some models.

Is this a useful tool if the serial number provides the same information? Another idea that accomplishes absolutely nothing.

[Michael Bluth]

Both the environment Minions have denied turning their backs on Kyoto; they say that while they turn their backs on any meaningful climate change action. They have to say this as Parliament voted to keep Kyoto. The best they can do is say that the targets are unmeetable (which they now are).

Meeting the Kyoto targets was not realistic by the end of the Chretien Regime. Rodriguez's PMB is a joke. Stuck in the Senate. It hasn't changed the Conservative's environmental policy at all. Great moral victory Pablo.

Openness, transparency and accountability are buzzwords the HarperCons-ervatives throw around but they do not really know what they mean. It's all a smoke screen like so much else. Slight of hand artists.

By any definition this Government is a lot more open, transparent and accountable than the Chretien regime or the Martin interregnum. But if any of y'all can substantiate these claims you are more than welcome.

Dion can't even break 30% in the polls. tsk tsk tsk poor Steph.

[Canuck E Stan]

Japan, Spain, Italy Face $33 Billion Kyoto Payments

Spain faces a $7.8 billion cost, and Italy and Japan each may owe about $13 billion, based on estimates by their governments and the current price for permits.

+

Japan to start buying carbon credits

Mark Partington, a consultant to EEA Fund Management, a carbon asset manager, said threatening to buy from Hungary and Russia was Japan's way of signalling it was not prepared to "comply at any price".

Japan is reluctant to spend vast amounts to comply with Kyoto as the US has never ratified the treaty and India and China have no obligation to cut emissions. Mr Mitsuhashi said Japan had to think about its own taxpayers as well as the environment.

+

UN: World has only 10 years to fix climate

$86 billion needed

The report said the United States and other rich nations should pay the biggest share of the $86 billion needed to fight global warming.

Half the cost, $44 billion, would go for “climate-proofing” developing nations’ infrastructure, while $40 billion would help the poor cope with climate-related risks. The other $2 billion would go to strengthening responses to natural disasters, the report said.

US Democratic Rep. Edward J. Markey, chair of the House select committee on energy independence and global warming, said the UN report showed the importance of “America moving toward the goal of 80-percent cuts in heat-trapping emissions by the middle of this century.”

“This report should give all leaders in Washington the moral imperative to back global warming action in Congress and in the White House,” Markey said in a statement.

= The participation of the U.S.,China and India is needed much more than purchasing credits that accomplish nothing towards Climate Change.

Harper has got it right.

[Michael Bluth]

= The participation of the U.S.,China and India is needed much more than purchasing credits that accomplish nothing towards Climate Change.

Harper has got it right.

Sneaky Conservatives. Being realistic and doing what is best for the country. Damn him.

[myata]

When did Harper ever promise not to scrap Kyoto? Your memory is false. Convenenient, as that is the only way your diatribe makes any sense.

Harper agreed to not take Canada out of Kyoto. I'm not going to do your work for your.

Why? You haven't done any research on any of your other histrionic claims. What makes this one special?

Information commissioner: Information commissioner on transparency of Harper's government

The rest of the claims is either common knowledge or has been confirmed. Obviously all you've got is hot air though. Like Harper cons. Coincidence? Or by definition?

[guyser]

By any definition this Government is a lot more open, transparent and accountable than the Chretien regime or the Martin interregnum. But if any of y'all can substantiate these claims you are more than welcome.

Why bother, since you will only ignore it . You know, just like yesterday.

Open? ...transparent?...oh my. The spinmeister strikes again.

So when a Minister sits in the back room and refuses to come out and talk....thats being open. So, if they lie, they are telling the truth.

Ok, got it, carry on.

[myata]

From your link:

Is this a useful tool if the serial number provides the same information? Another idea that accomplishes absolutely nothing.

Mr Mauser, let's clarify, for the public, is Harpers adviser from Simon Fraser University. Association of police chiefs, on the other hand, found the tool useful and recommended to implement it. For some reason, Mr Mauser's opinion holds greater weight with the PM than that of the country's police chiefs. And now, armed with Mr Mauser's support Harper is going to make the blast fighting the crime. Having scrapped two tools that police specifically asked to keep. More questions. No answers. No comments.

[Wild Bill]

By any definition this Government is a lot more open, transparent and accountable than the Chretien regime or the Martin interregnum.

Big flippin' deal!

From none to a teaspoon full!

Tell it to Garth Turner, or anybody else thrown out of caucus for refusing to be a ventriloquist's dummy!

Tell it to Manning and those of us who supported Reform, for the idea of free votes not being just a token but actually SOP, for the idea of policy coming from the grassroots and binding on the leadership!

Remember the cry "Your MP should take his constituents views to Ottawa, not Ottawa's views back to you!"

The age old point of pride in Canadian politics: "Gee, I don't stink as bad as the other guys!"

Harper will get my vote and that of others who feel as I do, but only by default. We'll hold our nose and vote Tory, the same as we did all those years ago. We'll do it grudgingly and not with any sense of being inspired.

Plus ca change, plus la meme chose. Comment veut dit "forever!"??

[jdobbin]

Why bother, since you will only ignore it . You know, just like yesterday.

Open? ...transparent?...oh my. The spinmeister strikes again.

So when a Minister sits in the back room and refuses to come out and talk....thats being open. So, if they lie, they are telling the truth.

Ok, got it, carry on.

Lunn hiding in a back room and not facing reporters on a unilateral decision by the government is certainly not transparent.

I guess we'll hear now how bad the Liberals are as a response.

[Argus]

Let me say the up front so there is no misunderstanding, I am an old school Conservative, in other words a Progressive.

In other words, a Liberal. The reason the Progressive Conservatives folded their tent was that people finally realized there was nothing to differentiate them from the Liberals except their complete failure to communicate or organize.

Edited December 2, 2007 by Argus

[Argus]

Slowly and carefully ... in case you can't take in more that 306 words at a time ... what I'm saying is that Harper cons deliberately avoid all open discussions of their agenda.

What agenda? Oh, right, the HIDDEN AGENDA!.

I can recall the Liberals running an entire campaign on the platform of opposing wage and price controls - then imposing them. I can remember the Liberals running an entire campaign on the platform of opposing a gas tax, then imposing one. I can remember the Liberals running an entire campaign on a platform of removing the GST, then keeping it. I can remember the Liberals talking out of both sides of their mouths, depending on what area of the country they lived in, and lying to everyone concerned about their plans and policies.

But none of that, evidently, bothered you or the OP at all. Suddenly - SUDDENLY! (dramatic flourish) you've discovered that politicians - well, conservative (eek!) politicians, aren't always completely frank with the electorate.

Quelle surprise!

Neither you nor the OP are the least bit concerned with politicians being open with the public.

You just hate Conservatives.

[myata]

More hot air. My issue is not with Harper changing his intentions bad as it can be. It's with him not stating, openly and publicly, what they are in the first place. Only Harper can say that he'll keep country in Kyoto, then do all he possibly could to torpedoe it. He'll say that there will be no returning to death penalty, then quietly pulls it in for Canadians convicted abroad. Says openness and transparency, but runs one of the most controlled and closed governments in the recent history. Somebody should be keeping a tally of infamous "no comments" by his ministers.

This is worse than inaction. It's contempt for democracy. Or, if you want to call it, hidden agenda, indeed

[Michael Bluth]

More hot air. My issue is not with Harper changing his intentions bad as it can be. It's with him not stating, openly and publicly, what they are in the first place. Only Harper can say that he'll keep country in Kyoto, then do all he possibly could to torpedoe it.

Harper never said he would keep Canada in Kyoto.

From a CBC article posted just before the 2006 election. Link

A Conservative government would abandon the Kyoto accord and set new Canadian-made targets that are easier to meet, leader Stephen Harper said Thursday in Halifax. Harper said Kyoto's emission targets couldn't be met within Canada or even internationally. He pointed to the country's woeful record on climate change since the agreement was signed in 1997.

Seems like he stated openly and publicly his intention to torpedo Kyoto before the election. So does this mean you don't have an issue with Harper on Kyoto now?

[myata]

OK my fault - he did campaign under that premise. And if he withdrew from Kyoto after the election, following his promise, it would have been honest. This is not what he did, however.

He said he'll keep Canada in Kyoto (could it be because he didn't dare to openly go against the will of the majority of Canadians?). At this point an honest position would be then to work on implementing the spirit, if not the letter, of the treaty. But Harper's people did all what they could to diminish it. Same with death penalty. Harper will never dare to come out open and say that he wants death penalty reinstated. But then he won't just accept the status quo either. Instead he'll say one thing, but quietly, behind closed doors, and with no comments, will do something else. This is what sneaky conservatism is all about.

[margrace]

When you have a party based on lies, the lies to David Orchard to get his support, I wonder what Canadians can expect. It started off that way and has gone from bad to worse. I suspect that anyone coming in here new and reading the various posts would have to conclude some things. Conservatives want to make abortion and non traditional marriage against the law. They support the immense amount of money spent on keeping Marijunana illegal, they want to bring back the death penalty. Some want to do away with our health care and privitize it, some want to do away with CPP and Old age pension.

They refuse to look at changing the laws that allowed a man like Picton to pick off prostitues in areas where there were no people around. The support supper jails, punishment rather than any attempt at rehabilition.

Sounds like the old testament doesn't it.

[Michael Bluth]

I suspect that anyone coming in here new and reading the various posts would have to conclude some things.

If they only read half the posts. Until my last post one would have to *conclude* Harper ran on supporting Kyoto. He did not.

Conservatives want to make abortion and non traditional marriage against the law. They support the immense amount of money spent on keeping Marijunana illegal, they want to bring back the death penalty. Some want to do away with our health care and privitize it, some want to do away with CPP and Old age pension.They refuse to look at changing the laws that allowed a man like Picton to pick off prostitues in areas where there were no people around. The support supper jails, punishment rather than any attempt at rehabilition.

None of these 'policy proposals' represent the current Government, thus they are terrible lies like "Guns in our streets."

Harper has said he will not re-open the abortion debate. He hasn't tried. *scary* *scary* *scary* lie #1

Harper promised a free vote on SSM and said the issue would die if it failed. He has kept his word. *scary* *scary* *scary* lie #2

Any support for Harper keeping Marijuana illegal costing immense amounts of money? *scary* *scary* *scary* lie #3

Harper doesn't support private health care. *scary* *scary* *scary* lie #4

Harper doesn't support doing away with CPP and Old age pension *scary* *scary* *scary* lie #5

Laws about Pickton? Do explain that one.

Supper jails. You are right. Harper supports serving super to prison inmates.

OK my fault - he did campaign under that premise. And if he withdrew from Kyoto after the election, following his promise, it would have been honest. This is not what he did, however. He said he'll keep Canada in Kyoto (could it be because he didn't dare to openly go against the will of the majority of Canadians?). At this point an honest position would be then to work on implementing the spirit, if not the letter, of the treaty. This is what sneaky conservatism is all about.

There's nothing sneaky about it.

I've done my research.

Now you do yours and show where Harper has said "he'll keep Canada in Kyoto".

Is the spirit of Kyoto reducing GHG emissions?

Then Harper is doing that.