Harper speaks at Conservative Convention

[?Impact]

So incest and child porn (which doesn't involve children) are okay?

Do you believe in the individual freedom of, say, the owner of a BNB to not rent to a gay couple?

What about the individual freedom of a bar to have smoking inside?

No you don't have the individual freedom to inflict harm on others. So no incest and child porn are not acceptable. Smoking is the same issue, it causes harm to others, including the employees.

You have the individual freedom to not invite a gay couple into your home. If you are running a business however, you have an obligation to not discriminate in the service you offer. You cannot have a water fountain for blacks and a water cooler for whites.

[Big Guy]

There used to be a small part of the Conservative party which represented homophobia, bigotry, racism and misogyny. They were tolerated because the Harper Conservatives needed them to maintain plurality support. Because of this, when pressed, they slid into niqab issues, anti-Muslim bigotry and that silly anti Muslim phone line. That put a nail into the Harper party coffin.

I have been watching the Conservative convention. The potential leaders are sprinting away from the extremists - gay marriage is now OK, the former Harper Ministers are denying their support of the niqab issue and many of the Harper policies, one of the front runners has apologized for her stand on the anti-Muslim phone line. The legitimacy that the Harper Conservatives had given to those unsavory prejudices is gone.

The bigots, homophobes, racists and misogynists now will have to search for a far extremist political party for legitimacy. Maybe the Wildrose Party in the West will go that route but I doubt it.

Those angry folks looking to blame visible groups, religions or genders to blame for their own mistakes are now where they have always been, an unsavory pariah looking for a host legitimate party.

Good luck!

[BC_chick]

I have been watching the Conservative convention. The potential leaders are sprinting away from the extremists - gay marriage is now OK, the former Harper Ministers are denying their support of the niqab issue and many of the Harper policies, one of the front runners has apologized for her stand on the anti-Muslim phone line. The legitimacy that the Harper Conservatives had given to those unsavory prejudices is gone.

I could easily vote Liberal, NDP and Green depending on the party leader and the strategic voting needs in my riding, but the CPC were never an option. Even if I agreed with some of their policies I just could not get on board with a group so ready to malign other Canadians.

It's nice to see the CPC starts dumping the attitudes. I think it will do them well in LGBT and ethnic communities.

Maybe if they start taking the environment seriously, I could even be swayed.

Oh who am I kidding I disagree with them on everything from crime and punishment to free trade agreements. I will never be centre-right.

Edited May 28, 2016 by BC_chick

[Big Guy]

I could easily vote Liberal, NDP and Green depending on the party leader and the strategic voting needs in my riding, but the CPC were never an option. Even if I agreed with some of their policies I just could not get on board with a group so ready to malign other Canadians.

It's nice to see the CPC starts dumping the attitudes. I think it will do them well in LGBT and ethnic communities.

Maybe if they start taking the environment seriously, I could even be swayed.

Oh who am I kidding I disagree with them on everything from crime and punishment to free trade agreements. I will never be centre-right.

Thanks for your honesty. I will try the same.

I had leaned towards the Progressive Conservatives for during the Chretian and Martin years when Harper was allowed (by turncoat Peter MacKay) to highjack the Conservative label and allow the far right extremists to take control in 2003. BTW - It looked good on him when Harper pulled the rug out and MacKay was now working for Harper. Great politics!

While the Liberals have many policies with which I agree their fiscal policy is not one that I have bought into. Trudeau will be around until at least another 3 years but if the Conservatives return to their Progressive Conservative roots then I will look at them again seriously.

As I have noted before, I am a great believer in Liberal or Conservative minorities with the NDP controlling legislation.

[waldo]

I don't get it.... is it supposed to be really insulting to call a man a woman? Why would that be? And why would Rona (a woman) think that this would be an appropriate insult/joke?

it is truly bizarre! Apparently, the appropriateness not withstanding, Conservatives will accept scoring an 'own goal' on themselves if they think they can nail/tarnish/belittle Prime Minister Trudeau in any way.

.

[waldo]

Gee, Waldo, in all your denunciation of Ibbitson you apparently forgot to address what he wrote... No doubt an oversight on your part.

there's really nothing specific to address; again, it's a subscription article and your short quote extract from it provides nothing substantive/concrete to speak to. All you left me was to speak to the long-established Ibbitson fawning over Harper - you're welcome!

.

[Shady]

There used to be a small part of the Conservative party which represented homophobia, bigotry, racism and misogyny. They were tolerated because the Harper Conservatives needed them to maintain plurality support. Because of this, when pressed, they slid into niqab issues, anti-Muslim bigotry and that silly anti Muslim phone line. That put a nail into the Harper party coffin.

I have been watching the Conservative convention. The potential leaders are sprinting away from the extremists - gay marriage is now OK, the former Harper Ministers are denying their support of the niqab issue and many of the Harper policies, one of the front runners has apologized for her stand on the anti-Muslim phone line. The legitimacy that the Harper Conservatives had given to those unsavory prejudices is gone.

The bigots, homophobes, racists and misogynists now will have to search for a far extremist political party for legitimacy. Maybe the Wildrose Party in the West will go that route but I doubt it.

Those angry folks looking to blame visible groups, religions or genders to blame for their own mistakes are now where they have always been, an unsavory pariah looking for a host legitimate party.

Good luck!

Complete and utter nonsense. A responsible and measured approach to things like refugees is only bigotry and racism to the very ignorant. The very ignorant have found a new home in the Justin government of Canada. Where they'll go in a few years is anyone's guess. Probably back to splitting with the Liberals and NDP. That's probably where the communist types and anti-Semitic types will go as well.

[Topaz]

PERHAPS, the following link will explain why Harper and his party lost the election as the article states 70 abuses and reason for the loss. Lets also remember some of this same MPs are still in the House today. http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2015/08/10/Harper-Abuses-of-Power-Final/

[waldo]

The very ignorant have found a new home in the Justin government of Canada. Where they'll go in a few years is anyone's guess. Probably back to splitting with the Liberals and NDP. That's probably where the communist types and anti-Semitic types will go as well.

say what! The 2015 election resulted in a purge of the ignorant from the Conservative Party? Who knew? And a purge of the, "communist types and anti-Semitic types", too? Who knew the CPC was so infiltrated - who knew!

.

[Argus]

No you don't have the individual freedom to inflict harm on others. So no incest and child porn are not acceptable.

How is incest causing harm to others? Can't two adults consent to a sexual relationship without you wanting to imprison them?

How is child porn which does not use actual children, such as cartoons or drawings, or written material cause harm to anyone?

Smoking is the same issue, it causes harm to others, including the employees.

But everyone involved is an individual who chooses to be there! Why can't we respect their individual freedom?

You have the individual freedom to not invite a gay couple into your home. If you are running a business however, you have an obligation to not discriminate in the service you offer. You cannot have a water fountain for blacks and a water cooler for whites.

I certainly agree that the state should not discriminate. But why shouldn't an individual business owner be free to discriminate if he or she so chooses provided the do not own a monopoly so that people discriminated against can simply go somewhere else? No harm, no foul, right?

[Argus]

there's really nothing specific to address; again, it's a subscription article and your short quote extract from it provides nothing substantive/concrete to speak to. All you left me was to speak to the long-established Ibbitson fawning over Harper - you're welcome!

.

Nonsense! Ibbitson said Harper had changed Canada by pulling the federal government out of areas which were properly provincial jurisdiction, ending decades of back and forth fighting and arguing between the two levels of government and turning Canada into a true federation again. You have no ability to comment on this?

[Argus]

There used to be a small part of the Conservative party which represented homophobia, bigotry, racism and misogyny. They were tolerated because the Harper Conservatives needed them to maintain plurality support. Because of this, when pressed, they slid into niqab issues, anti-Muslim bigotry and that silly anti Muslim phone line. That put a nail into the Harper party coffin.

That is a rather bizarre claim given that every poll taken on the issue showed massive support all across Canada for banning the niqab. In fact, the NDP's stalwart attack on the government on this issue is blamed by many for the sudden and drastic loss of support they suffered in Quebec.

[Argus]

I could easily vote Liberal, NDP and Green depending on the party leader and the strategic voting needs in my riding, but the CPC were never an option. Even if I agreed with some of their policies I just could not get on board with a group so ready to malign other Canadians.

It's nice to see the CPC starts dumping the attitudes. I think it will do them well in LGBT and ethnic communities.

Maybe if they start taking the environment seriously, I could even be swayed.

Oh who am I kidding I disagree with them on everything from crime and punishment to free trade agreements. I will never be centre-right.

Exactly, and most in the LGBT community would say the same. Therefore, it is pointless for the Conservatives to try to appeal to them.

As for ethnic communities, I wonder. Most Muslims voted Liberal because of the Conservatives' strong support for Israel and their anti-terror legislation. I'm willing to bet that downplaying both of those would have most Muslims switch from Liberals to Tories. After all, Muslims are no friends of gay friendly policies, abortion, or much else the Liberals stand for. Nor are Indo-Canadians, for that matter. In fact, most newcomers are decidedly more conservative on moral and social issues than most Canadians.

[waldo]

Nonsense! Ibbitson said Harper had changed Canada by pulling the federal government out of areas which were properly provincial jurisdiction, ending decades of back and forth fighting and arguing between the two levels of government and turning Canada into a true federation again. You have no ability to comment on this?

pffft! Notwithstanding your massaging of what he actually said, there's no there... there! Your actual quote from that subscription article - a supposed testament to Harper's lasting legacy: "Mr. Harper greatly reduced the scope and power of the federal government by limiting its ability to raise funds and by retreating from areas he believed were best managed by the provinces. He ended six decades of competition between Ottawa and the provincial capitals for dominance over the national agenda by having Ottawa surrender the field."

what's to comment on - there's no specificity! No... what was there prior, what did Harper actually do, what was the result, where is it at today, etc.. - it's just a broad brush fawning statement from Ibbitson, the HarperFawner extraordinaire. I appreciate that the current dismantling of much/most of what Harper was responsible for, has Conservative partisans looking for something to speak to as the (lasting) "Harper legacy".

.

[Big Guy]

Complete and utter nonsense. A responsible and measured approach to things like refugees is only bigotry and racism to the very ignorant. The very ignorant have found a new home in the Justin government of Canada. Where they'll go in a few years is anyone's guess. Probably back to splitting with the Liberals and NDP. That's probably where the communist types and anti-Semitic types will go as well.

Now that your Harper Conservative left overs are disclaiming most of the initiatives that you have been cheering, what party are you going to support? Looks like this new Progressive Conservative party is going to be a Liberal "light" in terms of domestic policy. What have the new Progressive Conservatives have to do to maintain your support?

Edited May 28, 2016 by Big Guy

[Army Guy]

It is not two different sides of the same coin as you are stating, but the same side of two different coins. The 'side' is individual freedom, not religion. We are not picking one religion over another, we are siding with individual freedoms.

If your suggesting religion had nothing to do with this topic , your wrong....She choose to dress the way she does because of religious reasons.....which form a large part of her decision and the reason the bill failed...

SO what of Quebec leading the new charge to ban face coverings, one that most feel is common sense...

Not because it is a racist, or bigoted, but from a common sense look at security for one, individual freedoms, are we sure we are defending them or enabling them, how can we be sure they are not being forced to submit to all these religious requirements....you can't....so we allow it...despite what we believe is wrong....it does nothing to push women rights further, one could argue it takes away from that....

Would it be common sense to give a women with her face covered children from a day care, money from a bank. or any other activity that would require a face to face encounter....

Edited May 28, 2016 by Army Guy

[waldo]

the Conservative Convention 'looking forward' theme still has the 2015 election defeat as the backdrop... and is being discussed at the convention in both a "beef session in what went wrong" and as reference towards electing the party's new national council this afternoon - and the new president chosen thereafter from within that new council. In that overall convention context, just announced, a scathing (post-mortem) report on the Conservative 2015 campaign failure:

Conservative Party officials get scathing review of 2015 election campaign --- Australian strategist slams campaign management as party members assess what went wrong

An Australian strategist has condemned the Conservative Party's 2015 federal election campaign in a scathing report that will be passed on to the party's new leadership after its convention in Vancouver this weekend.

The in-depth post-mortem was prepared by Brian Loughnane, the former federal director of the Australian Liberal party, who has had a longstanding working relationship with Canada's federal Conservative party.

Loughnane, acting as a neutral third party, interviewed dozens of people involved with the failed campaign, including its chair Guy Giorno and director Jenni Byrne.

The conclusions of the extensive review will not be made public. But they will be passed on to the party's new leadership by outgoing president John Walsh.

Senior Conservative sources tell CBC News that the assessment is very critical of the campaign's preparation and management.

.

[Shady]

Now that your Harper Conservative left overs are disclaiming most of the initiatives that you have been cheering, what party are you going to support? Looks like this new Progressive Conservative party is going to be a Liberal "light" in terms of domestic policy. What have the new Progressive Conservatives have to do to maintain your support?

I'm for the party that doesn't needlessly choose to run massive deficits, and create big structural deficits with OAS and EI. Undoing all the debt pay down and hardwork of the previous 15 - 20 years. Chrétien and Martin must be shaking their heads.

[BC_chick]

Exactly, and most in the LGBT community would say the same. Therefore, it is pointless for the Conservatives to try to appeal to them.

As for ethnic communities, I wonder. Most Muslims voted Liberal because of the Conservatives' strong support for Israel and their anti-terror legislation. I'm willing to bet that downplaying both of those would have most Muslims switch from Liberals to Tories. After all, Muslims are no friends of gay friendly policies, abortion, or much else the Liberals stand for. Nor are Indo-Canadians, for that matter. In fact, most newcomers are decidedly more conservative on moral and social issues than most Canadians.

I wouldn't be so quick to discount the LGBT community. Many are fiscal-conservatives who just can't stomach voting for a party with such strong stances against equality.

[BC_chick]

Stop the presses, the CPC has shifted policy to neutral on SSM.

SSM has been law for what, 10 years now, and the best they can do is be neutral? What a disgrace.

[Argus]

Stop the presses, the CPC has shifted policy to neutral on SSM.

SSM has been law for what, 10 years now, and the best they can do is be neutral? What a disgrace.

Why is it a disgrace? It seems to me that it's entirely in keeping with the elder Trudeau's statement that "the state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation."

Are you saying it should be the government's role to push same sex marriage?

[Newfoundlander]

Exactly, and most in the LGBT community would say the same. Therefore, it is pointless for the Conservatives to try to appeal to them.

What? Care to clarify?

[Argus]

What? Care to clarify?

What's to clarify? We're talking political realities here. The tories will always be third choice (at best) for the vast majority of the LGBT community. They'd have a much better chance going for the Muslim vote, and the votes of other conservative newcomers.

[Newfoundlander]

What's to clarify? We're talking political realities here. The tories will always be third choice (at best) for the vast majority of the LGBT community. They'd have a much better chance going for the Muslim vote, and the votes of other conservative newcomers.

Because all LGBT think alike?

[waldo]

Stop the presses, the CPC has shifted policy to neutral on SSM.

SSM has been law for what, 10 years now, and the best they can do is be neutral? What a disgrace.

radical! Revolutionary! with ~30% still opposed to the motion... don't they know it's 2016?

Conservative delegates at the party's policy convention in Vancouver have voted to strike the definition of marriage in the party's official policy document.

In a 1036-462 vote, delegates from all provinces except Saskatchewan cast majority votes in favour of no longer defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman.

The result followed a heated debate and brought cheers across the hall. It shifts the party's official position on same-sex marriage from being against the unions, to neutral.

.