Jump to content

Are the Liberals Heading Back to Church


Recommended Posts

http://www.cfrb.com/node/88933

Now comes perhaps the more shocking news, the Liberals, under Michael Ignatieff, are reaching out to religious voters.

Specifically, the Liberals are planning to try to reconnect with Evangelical Christians, MP John McKay is the man heading up the effort. Today Evangelicals are a group mostly thought of in terms of Republican support in the United States, yet at one point they did vote for Liberal MPs, especially in Ontario.

Michael Ignatieff wants to make sure church-going Christian voters feel at home in the Liberal Party. He has his work cut out for him, but John McKay is the right man to make the approach in Evangelical circles. McKay is the past moderator of Spring Garden Church in Willowdale and was co-founder of the Canadian division of the Christian Legal Fellowship, an organization of Christian lawyers. His voting record on same-sex marriage (he voted against) and his pro-life stance won’t make him many friends in some parts of the Liberal Party, but will help him in speaking to a community he knows well but that the Liberals have avoided like the plague.

Evangelical christians? How shocking, especially for Harper haters such as Normanchateau, et al. Unbelievable. Ignatieff's choice, McKay, to bring on in to HIS party all of those holy rolling evangelicals, etc., voted AGAINST same sex marriage and is an anti 'pro-choicer' ----

This must of course be the latest 'war room' strategy of that sue-em-all Kinsella! The GRIT GIRL (AKA Warren Kinsella) of the new liberal attack ads now playing on You Tube. Not too sneaky Kinsella since everyone in the know detected your 'catty' attacks on the first attack ad against the Conservatives.

Weep on and on Norman -- imagine an anti SSM'er being appointed to pander to the evangelicals for Master Ignatieff ....

By the way Mrs. Progressive -- where are all of those attack ads against Ignatieff and HIS party -- you know, the attack ads you wrote 20 or more threads on?

`

Edited by Alexandra
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

By the way Mrs. Progressive -- where are all of those attack ads against Ignatieff and HIS party -- you know, the attack ads you wrote 20 or more threads on?

`

The media says they're there. The Conservatives simply realize that this isn't the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way Mrs. Progressive -- where are all of those attack ads against Ignatieff and HIS party -- you know, the attack ads you wrote 20 or more threads on?

I don't think I started any threads on it but every paper in the country covered the fact that the Tories were combing through all of Ignatieff's writings preparing attack ads that were ready to go. They were bragging about it.

Tories drop the gloves on Ignatieff, prepare attack ads

I've also said that when it comes to religion, the Tories do not hold the franchise. Most Liberals are Christians, as are the Bloc and probably many NDP. Paul Martin kept an evangelical advisor on staff and Liberal Prime Minister Lester Pearson was an Evangelical. Trudeau was a devout Catholic and one Bloc member was a Catholic priest. There are also pro-lifers from other parties. You don't have to be Conservative to believe in God, anymore than you have to believe in God to be a Conservative.

However, church and state should be divided. I firmly believe that.

Ignatieff is accepting that when he is PM, everyone in the country will be represented.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Evangelical christians? How shocking, especially for Harper haters such as Normanchateau, et al. Unbelievable. Ignatieff's choice, McKay, to bring on in to HIS party all of those holy rolling evangelicals, etc., voted AGAINST same sex marriage and is an anti 'pro-choicer' ----

The Liberals are also fishing in the separatist and ADQ ponds in Quebec.

Denis Coderre says he has had talks with “fatigued“ sovereigntists about possibly running for the Liberals in the next federal election but wouldn’t identify them.

Members of the provincial ADQ, which has been reduced to third place in the legislature and is searching for a new leader, are also being courted.

Coderre says he is pitching the Liberals led by Ignatieff as the best party to defend Quebec’s interests.

http://www.winnipegsun.com/news/canada/200...16/8770776.html

In response to criticism for courting separatists, Liberals will say the party is a big tent and describe these concerted efforts of recruitment as "reaching out". Of course, if the Conservatives took such measures, the Liberals would accused them of "pandering" and making deals with those who want to break up the country. The Liberals need to take a close, good long look at themselves in the mirror.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's that "big tent" I was talking about in my post just after PT's. Didn't take long eh?

An obsessive compulsion perhaps, Cap?

As to the "Quebecers are a Nation"?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...y/WBwbradwanski

Congratulations, Michael Ignatieff. You've found your Jean Lapierre.

Remember, this is the same person who tried to build support for his first leadership campaign by setting in motion the chain of events that led to Quebec being declared a nation within Canada. We don't know much about Ignatieff's policy views, of yet, but we do know that he's quite confident that the way to Quebeckers' hearts is through a softer version of federalism........ etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Liberals need to take a close, good long look at themselves in the mirror.

Oh no. Not “fatigued“ sovereigntists! They should be driven from the country. Do you think they might just be tired of the whole separatist thing and want a place to hang their hat. Can't do that with the Conservatives anymore, after Harper's nonsense.

There 's a pretty good article on Liberalism and Christianity in America, but it fits here too. The mistaken belief that you can't be both.

Wasn’t Jesus A Liberal?

"Liberalism has been under assault for years now. The battering of this grand political philosophy has altered the contemporary definition of liberal to the point that Conservatives use it as a profane word. They use it to paint a political opponent as anti-God and anti-American. It has gotten to the point that moderate and liberal Christians are afraid to be open about their political leanings. Sadly, it even affects their conscience and choices as they enter the voting booth. This is particularly troubling to me as a Christian evangelical minister who loves America.

Liberalism as defined by Webster’s Third New International Dictionary: “a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of man, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for tolerance and freedom for the individual from arbitrary authority in all spheres of life…”

I am not sure why anyone would feel threatened by Liberalism as defined by the dictionary. They are apparently unaware or simply refuse to acknowledge the long history of liberals who have labored for the betterment of society and the furthering of God’s Kingdom."

There are others claiming he was a socialist, but by today's standards he would not have been a Conservative. He was opposed to war, intolerance and greed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Evangelical christians?

I think Ignatieff might be able to reach some of Christians who believe in the environment and in fiscal conservatism, two areas where the Conservatives have not shown strength in the last years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And you think there's something wrong with having a position that most moderates can support?

I have no problem with individuals who are moderate in their views. I'm one of them.

Smallc, what do you think about having separatists run as candidates for the Liberal party? The public doesn't care if the separatists are "fatigued" as the article about Coderre suggests. In the public's eye, once a separatist always a separatist.

There's no doubt about it. Courting Evangelicals and disaffected separatists is a sure sign the Liberals are desperately trying to re-brand the party. In doing so, they may disaffect some of their present and prospective supporters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In response to criticism for courting separatists, Liberals will say the party is a big tent and describe these concerted efforts of recruitment as "reaching out".

Many people who vote BQ or ADQ are not separatists. They do want solid representation in Ottawa from their region.

Of course, if the Conservatives took such measures, the Liberals would accused them of "pandering" and making deals with those who want to break up the country. The Liberals need to take a close, good long look at themselves in the mirror.

The Tories did take such measures and spent a lot of money but they are threatened cultural issues in the last election and it brought out that old distrust. Talk about misplaying. The Tories might have won their majority if they could shown many Quebecers that they would be strong advocates for their language and culture in Ottawa. Shame really. It is why I said just as the last election started that you can't underestimate the Bloc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem with individuals who are moderate in their views. I'm one of them.

If you were, you might consider that not all who vote for the Bloc are separatists.

what do you think about having separatists run as candidates for the Liberal party?

Don't think that will happen.

There's no doubt about it. Courting Evangelicals and disaffected separatists is a sure sign the Liberals are desperately trying to re-brand the party. In doing so, they may disaffect some of their present and prospective supporters.

Since some Christians want better effforts on the environment and fiscal conservatism, they might find a home with a Liberal vote.

And it is you who used the word separatists. I would settle for former BQ voters. Were those the same votes the Tories wanted? Or do you think once a BQ, definitely a separatist?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Ignatieff might be able to reach some of Christians who believe in the environment and in fiscal conservatism, two areas where the Conservatives have not shown strength in the last years.

Oh, please. Dobbin. For the past three years on this board there has been attack upon attack on the so-called 'evangelical-right-wing-anti-gay-anti-abortion-anti-SSM' PM Harper and EVERY Conservative in Canada. No matter how many MODERATE Conservatives are actual supporters/members of the CPC and do in fact OUTNUMBER by far the so-called religious so-cons there are and have been condescending and nasty comments about all of those right-wing religious nuts, especially the PM, Stephen Harper.

Do not attempt at this stage of the game to again do a 180, this time, on your opinion of "Christians" and their conservative radical policies by classifying them as "some Christians who believe in the environment or are fiscal conservatives" who have not been served by the CPC. but who would now be served best by Ignatieff's NEW open policy to the EVANGELISTS. Ignatieff is attempting to snare the EVANGELIST christians. Not some greenie or fiscally conservative christian.

What you are really saying is: It is now just peachy keen for the less nutty christians to be conned by Master Ignatieff and his MP McKay to join and DONATE to HIS party rather than those crackpot christian Evangelists!

`

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you were, you might consider that not all who vote for the Bloc are separatists.

What makes you think Coderre was referring to the Bloc. He didn't specify the Bloc. Maybe he talked to "fatigued" Parti Quebecois separatists.

Since some Christians want better effforts on the environment and fiscal conservatism, they might find a home with a Liberal vote.

That's possible.

Or do you think once a BQ, definitely a separatist?

We don't know whether Coderre is courting BQ, PQ or both.

No, I don't think all Bloc voters want separation. But neither are all Bloc voters willing to run for office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What makes you think Coderre was referring to the Bloc. He didn't specify the Bloc. Maybe he talked to "fatigued" Parti Quebecois separatists.

I certainly know he didn't use the word separatist although you seem to indicate that he is.

That's possible.

It was said that some evangelicals had a hard time with Bush policies on the environment and the deficit. Certainly Obama captured a percentage of the evangelical vote and that seems to have been a factor for some.

We don't know whether Coderre is courting BQ, PQ or both.

And you take this to mean BQ MPs, PQ MNAs?

No, I don't think all Bloc voters want separation. But neither are all Bloc voters willing to run for office.

They don't have to run for office. They just have to believe that a federalist party will better represent them in Ottawa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What makes you think Coderre was referring to the Bloc. He didn't specify the Bloc. Maybe he talked to "fatigued" Parti Quebecois separatists.

That's possible.

We don't know whether Coderre is courting BQ, PQ or both.

No, I don't think all Bloc voters want separation. But neither are all Bloc voters willing to run for office.

From Radwanski's piece in the Mope and Wail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...y/WBwbradwanski

Even if you believe that's the case, Denis Coderre - for whom nuance does not exactly come naturally - does not seem like the best person to pursue it. The lines between nationalists and federalists in Quebec are more blurred than they used to be, and it's possible to pursue some initiatives that meet the interests of both. But inviting people who expressly seek the break-up of the country - or, for that matter, the weird collection of populists who comprise the ADQ - into your caucus is pretty well guararanteed to end badly, as it did for Paul Martin, or really, really badly, as it did for Brian Mulroney.

But then, so is appointing a shallow opportunist as your point man in the most fraught province in the country.

There's an irony in Ignatieff going down that route. As Rob Silver notes, the Liberals' strategy these days is to figure out what Stephane Dion would do, and then do the opposite. But because their institutional memory apparently goes back only as far as December, 2006, the mistakes of Dion's predecessor - and their consequences - have apparently been erased from consideration.

"ended badly for Mulroney" = Bouchard!

`

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, please. Dobbin. For the past three years on this board there has been attack upon attack on the so-called 'evangelical-right-wing-anti-gay-anti-abortion-anti-SSM' PM Harper and EVERY Conservative in Canada. No matter how many MODERATE Conservatives are actual supporters/members of the CPC and do in fact OUTNUMBER by far the so-called religious so-cons there are and have been condescending and nasty comments about all of those right-wing religious nuts, especially the PM, Stephen Harper.

There are social conservatives in the Conservative party. We have seen that social policy manifested in the change on the death penalty by Day. The court ruled that he could not act unilaterally on the matter. That is the moderate Tory policy?

One of the main things that people worry about with Harper is that a majority will suddenly unleash a lot of social conservative policies even if incrementally. For example, it is easy to see the Tories try something like the death penalty for killing a peace office. They'd make it a wedge issue.

Do not attempt at this stage of the game to again do a 180, this time, on your opinion of "Christians" and their conservative radical policies by classifying them as "some Christians who believe in the environment or are fiscal conservatives" who have not been served by the CPC. but who would now be served best by Ignatieff's NEW open policy to the EVANGELISTS. Ignatieff is attempting to snare the EVANGELIST christians. Not some greenie or fiscally conservative christian.

Since we have already seen how Obama appealed to some Christians, it is easy to see how the Liberals might do the same.

In the U.S., it was very evangelical churches who had issues with the environment. It did affect the vote.

What you are really saying is: It is now just peachy keen for the less nutty christians to be conned by Master Ignatieff and his MP McKay to join and DONATE to HIS party rather than those crackpot christian Evangelists!

I am saying that some evangelicals might not be best served by voting for Tories if issues like the environment and the deficit are important to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I certainly know he didn't use the word separatist although you seem to indicate that he is.

I know he didn't say "separatists" because I posted the link to the article. You're deflecting because you surmised he was talking to Bloc supporters and I corrected you.

And you take this to mean BQ MPs, PQ MNAs?

Do you always purposely read things into posts that are not there?

They don't have to run for office.

Clearly, Coderre's looking for candidates.

"Denis Coderre says he has had talks with “fatigued“ sovereigntists about possibly running for the Liberals in the next federal election but wouldn’t identify them."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know he didn't say "separatists" because I posted the link to the article. You're deflecting because you surmised he was talking to Bloc supporters and I corrected you.

But you keep saying separatist. Why do it? You misdirected and I pointed out to that he didn't talk about separatists.

Do you always purposely read things into posts that are not there?

Do you always words that were not used in your own link?

Clearly, Coderre's looking for candidates.

"Denis Coderre says he has had talks with “fatigued“ sovereigntists about possibly running for the Liberals in the next federal election but wouldn’t identify them."

I was responding your remarks on whether they will run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are social conservatives in the Conservative party. We have seen that social policy manifested in the change on the death penalty by Day. The court ruled that he could not act unilaterally on the matter. That is the moderate Tory policy?

One of the main things that people worry about with Harper is that a majority will suddenly unleash a lot of social conservative policies even if incrementally. For example, it is easy to see the Tories try something like the death penalty for killing a peace office. They'd make it a wedge issue.

Yes, as there are social conservatives in the Liberal party. The death penalty? Where? Oh, are you referring to the murderer on death row in Montana? That death penalty policy -- in the United States of America? Dobbin, do you propose that Canada should act as Intervenor in death penalty cases in the U.S.? Are you suggesting that since Canada abolished the death penalty and if a Canadian citizen chooses to murder one, two or more Americans Canada's policy should apply in each and every State of the Union? If you do, then since there are States in the U.S. who still enforce the death penalty, California for one, would you agree that California's government should be given the same intervenor status in Canada if one of their citizens had been convicted of murdering one, two or more Canadians; -- that California should be given the right to enforce the death penalty in Canada? Simple, isn't it? Whatever gives Canada the right to dictate it's policies on the death penalty to the United States? The Appeal judge refused to speak to that niggling little question.

Oh, yes. suddenly unleashing so-con policies. Incrementally. Try that one again Dobbin but with less irony. If you believe that a 'moderately socialist' country like Canada would vote for a party - any party - that attempted to force death penalty policies or any so-con policies on it's citizens then - you must be desperate to convince me. Although you might check the local blogs in Vancouver and find a huge surprise. There are demands to bring back the death penalty. 40 plus shootings, 20 deaths and now the females are being gunned down as well as dodging bullets in the malls. The death penalty is looking attractive.

I am saying that some evangelicals might not be best served by voting for Tories if issues like the environment and the deficit are important to them.

I quite understand what you are saying. Now that Master Ignatieff has proclaimed his affection for those Evangelical so-cons and wish those nut cases (smirk) to join and worship HE and his acolytes you, Dobbin, are fine with that.

`

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, as there are social conservatives in the Liberal party.

Always has been. However, the Liberals as a whole have moved towards liberal social policies whereas the Tories have been less inclined in that way.

The death penalty? Where? Oh, are you referring to the murderer on death row in Montana? That death penalty policy -- in the United States of America?

Yes. Canada has had a policy of asking for clemency for all Canadians facing the death penalty in all countries including the U.S.

Dobbin, do you propose that Canada should act as Intervenor in death penalty cases in the U.S.?

For Canadians, yes.

Are you suggesting that since Canada abolished the death penalty and if a Canadian citizen chooses to murder one, two or more Americans Canada's policy should apply in each and every State of the Union? If you do, then since there are States in the U.S. who still enforce the death penalty, California for one, would you agree that California's government should be given the same intervenor status in Canada if one of their citizens had been convicted of murdering one, two or more Canadians;

Canada informs the U.S. any time one of their citizens is charged with a crime.

-- that California should be given the right to enforce the death penalty in Canada?

No can ask for a penalty that doesn't exist in Canada.

Simple, isn't it? Whatever gives Canada the right to dictate it's policies on the death penalty to the United States? The Appeal judge refused to speak to that niggling little question.

Canada is not dictating policy to the U.S. It is asking for clemency which is in the political domain of the Governor to give.

Oh, yes. suddenly unleashing so-con policies. Incrementally. Try that one again Dobbin but with less irony.

This has been talked about by Tory advisers in Globe and Mail articles. Have you not read that?

If you believe that a 'moderately socialist' country like Canada would vote for a party - any party - that attempted to force death penalty policies or any so-con policies on it's citizens then - you must be desperate to convince me. Although you might check the local blogs in Vancouver and find a huge surprise. There are demands to bring back the death penalty.

As I said, the first incremental move by the Tories was to stop speaking for Canadians outside of Canada facing the death penalty. I expect the next incremental move was to ask for the death penalty for the killing of peace officers.

40 plus shootings, 20 deaths and now the females are being gunned down as well as dodging bullets in the malls. The death penalty is looking attractive.

I'm sure it does for social conservatives in the Conservative party and that is why I expect if they had a majority, you would see it come back.

I quite understand what you are saying. Now that Master Ignatieff has proclaimed his affection for those Evangelical so-cons and wish those nut cases (smirk) to join and worship HE and his acolytes you, Dobbin, are fine with that.

I expect that for some evangelicals who like fiscal conservatism, they will consider the Liberal party in the next election.

I expect for those wanting the end of all abortion, they will look to the Tories or other parties further right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...