Should the Conservative Party become liberals?

[-TSS-]

It is very rarely a working strategy to abandon your core-base and become successful. People will always prefer to vote for the real thing than a cheap copy.

However, if you keep on trying to win with an unelectable agenda like the Labour-party in the UK you are well-adviced to change your policies, which happened in the 1990's.

[WestCanMan]

20 hours ago, eyeball said:

Why is that conservative right-wingers who piss and moan about corruption when the other guy does it never put in measures to make that corruption more difficult to commit when they're in power? I mean,  what does it say to you when a Conservative government introduces deferred prosecutors agreements for corporations who commit crimes instead?  It says to me that right-wingers have given up on stopping corruption and do more to actually normalize it than anything.  Corruption is only an issue when the other team and the other side does it.

The Conservatives and Liberals are so similar already that dimples and hair are about all their is to tell them apart.  Just different lines on the same team as far as wealth power and their lobbyists are concerned.

Why do you pick sides again?  Because your stupid and you're wrong.

Talk about being stupid and wrong, it was Trudeau's government that created the DPA law that was used for SNC Lavalin: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deferred_prosecution_agreement_(Canada)

Quote

In 2018, the government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau introduced legislation to provide for deferred prosecution agreements in Canada, as part of the omnibus Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 1. The new provisions would be added to the Criminal Code as Part XXII.1. The government explained that the provisions would be an enhancement of the existing federal Integrity Regime. The goal of the legislation would be to give prosecutors additional tools to deal with allegations of commercial crimes. The Parliament of Canada enacted Part XXII.1 in June 2018.

It was Harper's Government that created a law banning companies like SNC, convicted of actual crimes, from bidding on federal contracts for ten years. 

Trudeau created the DPA law (tucked into the back of an omnibus bill on pg 500 and some) to circumvent that law, then tried to force the AG to use it for SNC even though she said it was inappropriate in SNC's case. Then he lied about pressuring her, and fired her from that position, bad-mouthed her, prevented her from speaking in her own defence, and kicked her out of the Liberal party. He did all of that for a company that was caught bribing Michel Fournier, another Liberal politician, by giving him $2.3M in bribes for help winning a $127M bridge contract (Jacques Cartier Bridge).

So, by acting like what I say is false, you're squarely on the side of the Libs and the MSM. 

Who's the one looking stupid, again eyeball? You should stop using that word. 

[eyeball]

8 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

Plenty of leftists don't want federalism, but prefer to live in small autonomous communes. More power for the small-minded.

Yes I've long noticed how contemptuous right-wingers are towards regional autonomy in favor of one all-powerful centralized government calling all the shots, just like Liberals and Conservatives actually. Big powerful corporations don't have any more interest in dealing with hundreds of communities than big powerful governments do either. How convenient that governments and corporations see eye to eye so clearly.

In the face of so much bluster about keeping governments off people's backs...right wingers are just so filled with shit it's not the least bit funny.

Edited December 25, 2019 by eyeball

[eyeball]

5 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Talk about being stupid and wrong, it was Trudeau's government that created the DPA law that was used for SNC Lavalin: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deferred_prosecution_agreement_(Canada)

Creating a law and introducing the reasons why are two different things, in any case and from your link;

Quote

In 2015, the Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC) department of the government of Canada introduced the Integrity Regime, to "ensure the government does business only with ethical suppliers in Canada and abroad"

 

Quote

As part of its commitment in the 2015 Economic Action Plan, a strong government-wide Integrity Regime has been put in place to ensure that the Government conducts business with ethical suppliers.

https://www.international.gc.ca/development-developpement/partners-partenaires/bt-oa/integrity-regime-regime-integrite.aspx?lang=eng

The 2015 Economic Action Plan came out in May 2015 on Harper's watch. The first steps on the road towards the development of DPA's were taken by Conservatives who should have flagged these as get out of jail free cards the minute they saw our friends and allies developing them. Why didn't they?

In Canada it was clearly Conservatives who got this acquiescence ball rolling towards dodgy corporate interests and Liberals happily kept that ball rolling. This is how economic playing fields always get tilted towards the rich and powerful no matter if its a Liberal or a Conservative government.

This reminds me of how the westcoast commercial fishery was dismantled and reengineered over a period of time during which both Conservative and Liberal regimes  ruled.  Thousands of people lost their livelihoods and hundreds of companies went out of business, and when the dust settled BC's richest billionaire wound up controlling 40% of the coastwide quota.  This is how Canada rolls. Always has.

Quote

It was Harper's Government that created a law banning companies like SNC, convicted of actual crimes, from bidding on federal contracts for ten years.

Assuming they were charged in the first place, I would really like to have seen what would have happened if SNC happened to be an oil company based in Alberta. I doubt the Conservatives would have been making anywhere near the amount of noise over the issue. 

Quote

Trudeau created the DPA law (tucked into the back of an omnibus bill on pg 500 and some) to circumvent that law, then tried to force the AG to use it for SNC even though she said it was inappropriate in SNC's case.

Not once in all the hoopla over SNC did any Conservative politician question the morality or utility of DPA's.  In fact right-wingers routinely defended and legitimized them on the basis that our competitors were using them.

I'm staunchly against DPA's can you say the same thing?
 

Quote

Then he lied about pressuring her, and fired her from that position, bad-mouthed her, prevented her from speaking in her own defence, and kicked her out of the Liberal party. He did all of that for a company that was caught bribing Michel Fournier, another Liberal politician, by giving him $2.3M in bribes for help winning a $127M bridge contract (Jacques Cartier Bridge).

So, by acting like what I say is false, you're squarely on the side of the Libs and the MSM. 

Who's the one looking stupid, again eyeball? You should stop using that word.

Sure he lied which has nothing to do with the fact that the only real difference between Liberals and Conservatives is dimples and hair. As far as the rich and powerful are concerned there's no need for Conservatives to become more like Liberals or vise versa.

You look a lot stupider trying to build a case for discerning big differences that matter little in the scheme of things and that you should attribute some weird media-party conspiracy into the reason why is especially retarded.

Edited December 26, 2019 by eyeball

[-TSS-]

In Canada you have conservatives and liberals with the liberals being the left-wing option. In Australia they have liberals and the labour, sorry labor, with the liberals being the right-wing option while the labor are being hard left with open borders and climate-hysteria policies.

Do you think Trudeau would be considered  right-wing in Australia?

[eyeball]

49 minutes ago, -TSS- said:

In Canada you have conservatives and liberals with the liberals being the left-wing option. In Australia they have liberals and the labour, sorry labor, with the liberals being the right-wing option while the labor are being hard left with open borders and climate-hysteria policies.

Do you think Trudeau would be considered  right-wing in Australia?

Don't know or care myself.

What might be more informative is knowing if wealth and income gaps are widening as fast in Australia as Canada. I suspect they are myself and can't see why they wouldn't be.

Corruption is like the so-called dark energy said to be accelerateing our universe's expansion. You can't see it but you can infer its existence from its effects.

Edited December 26, 2019 by eyeball

[Moonlight Graham]

On 12/24/2019 at 3:54 PM, WestCanMan said:

When our PM accepts a gift, like a helicopter flight, from a foreign lobbyist, and the media gives it as much coverage as ducks crossing a freeway, there's a problem. All of Trudeau's scandals put together have gotten 1/4 of the coverage than $90K duffygate did.

Not sure i agree.  The helicopter flight got some run in the media and the SNC Lavalin scandal got more run in the media than any of Harper's scandals, including Duffy.

[eyeball]

1 minute ago, Moonlight Graham said:

 the SNC Lavalin scandal got more run in the media than any of Harper's scandals, including Duffy.

For pretty mundane reasons really.  The real left-wing in this country was able to get a few words in edgewise about get-out-of-jail-free-cards but where were the Conservatives on that score?  Winking and nodding right along with the Liberals is where.

[Moonlight Graham]

51 minutes ago, eyeball said:

For pretty mundane reasons really.  The real left-wing in this country was able to get a few words in edgewise about get-out-of-jail-free-cards but where were the Conservatives on that score?  Winking and nodding right along with the Liberals is where.

It wasn't mundane.

[Moonlight Graham]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Corruption is like the so-called dark energy said to be accelerateing our universe's expansion. You can't see it but you can infer its existence from its effects.

I think it can be seen, if we look closely enough.  Follow the money.

[eyeball]

59 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

It wasn't mundane.

It sure missed the most salient point - politicians and corporations getting together and tilting the playing field behind closed doors.

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, Moonlight Graham said:

I think it can be seen, if we look closely enough.  Follow the money.

Always after the fact when the damage is done and WOAH Lokkit that its freakin' Justin Beiber and the Kardashians!!!

Excuse me but Jody Wilson who-really-gives-a-fuck?  It's not like she blew a whistle on any real perpetration it was always about the process.

Edited December 26, 2019 by eyeball

[OftenWrong]

17 hours ago, eyeball said:

In the face of so much bluster about keeping governments off people's backs...right wingers are just so filled with shit it's not the least bit funny.

At least that is their stated objective. The right needs reform, it needs a clear voice. It needs a leader of greatness...

[cannuck]

11 hours ago, eyeball said:

It sure missed the most salient point - politicians and corporations getting together and tilting the playing field behind closed doors.

Yeah, almost as bad as when politicians and unions get together to tilt the playing field.

BTW: you DO realize that your Messiah, Tommy the Commie was a director of Husky Oil in his later years.

Edited December 26, 2019 by cannuck

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, cannuck said:

Yeah, almost as bad as when politicians and unions get together to tilt the playing field.

See you're starting to get it. It's slowly dawning on you that nothing good can come from letting politicians sneak around behind closed doors with ANYONE.

Quote

BTW: you DO realize that your Messiah, Tommy the Commie was a director of Husky Oil in his later years.

I follow Pol Pot actually.  That doesn't come thru in my posts?

[taxme]

On 12/24/2019 at 12:54 PM, WestCanMan said:

When our PM accepts a gift, like a helicopter flight, from a foreign lobbyist, and the media gives it as much coverage as ducks crossing a freeway, there's a problem. All of Trudeau's scandals put together have gotten 1/4 of the coverage than $90K duffygate did.

They do not call Trudeau "Teflon Don" for nothing. When one has the globalist and MSM elite leftist liberal media mob on your side, then Trudeau can do pretty much whatever he wants to do. Must be nice, eh? I am so jealous of Chief Spreading Bull. 

[taxme]

On 12/24/2019 at 7:24 PM, cannuck said:

I would really like to argue with you just for the sake of being here, but when you're right, you're right.

BTW:  Merry Christmas to all of the Christians here, Happy Hannukah to the Jews, and happy something to whatever the hell everyone thinks of for the holiday.

Pretty soon, all religions will end up being lumped in at the same time with Christmas here in Canada. On the 25th of December, all religions will be celebrated on that same day. They already have shoved Hanukkah in at the same time as Christmas, otherwise no one would even know or care about that so called "H" celebration of what, I do not know. 

[taxme]

20 hours ago, -TSS- said:

In Canada you have conservatives and liberals with the liberals being the left-wing option. In Australia they have liberals and the labour, sorry labor, with the liberals being the right-wing option while the labor are being hard left with open borders and climate-hysteria policies.

Do you think Trudeau would be considered  right-wing in Australia?

Trudeau is a globalist, and that is even better for him, and all politicians to be, otherwise they will go no further in their political careers if they stay neutral. If a politician is not wearing a brown nose on his/her face after being in politics for one year, then he/she has not yet learned the art of the deal as to how to play the crooked and corrupt political game. 

[WestCanMan]

On 12/25/2019 at 1:14 PM, eyeball said:

Creating a law and introducing the reasons why are two different things, in any case and from your link;

 

The 2015 Economic Action Plan came out in May 2015 on Harper's watch. The first steps on the road towards the development of DPA's were taken by Conservatives who should have flagged these as get out of jail free cards the minute they saw our friends and allies developing them. Why didn't they?

In Canada it was clearly Conservatives who got this acquiescence ball rolling towards dodgy corporate interests and Liberals happily kept that ball rolling. This is how economic playing fields always get tilted towards the rich and powerful no matter if its a Liberal or a Conservative government.

This reminds me of how the westcoast commercial fishery was dismantled and reengineered over a period of time during which both Conservative and Liberal regimes  ruled.  Thousands of people lost their livelihoods and hundreds of companies went out of business, and when the dust settled BC's richest billionaire wound up controlling 40% of the coastwide quota.  This is how Canada rolls. Always has.

Assuming they were charged in the first place, I would really like to have seen what would have happened if SNC happened to be an oil company based in Alberta. I doubt the Conservatives would have been making anywhere near the amount of noise over the issue. 

Not once in all the hoopla over SNC did any Conservative politician question the morality or utility of DPA's.  In fact right-wingers routinely defended and legitimized them on the basis that our competitors were using them.

I'm staunchly against DPA's can you say the same thing?
 

Sure he lied which has nothing to do with the fact that the only real difference between Liberals and Conservatives is dimples and hair. As far as the rich and powerful are concerned there's no need for Conservatives to become more like Liberals or vise versa.

You look a lot stupider trying to build a case for discerning big differences that matter little in the scheme of things and that you should attribute some weird media-party conspiracy into the reason why is especially retarded.

Eyeball give it up. The Libs created the DPA law in question, you were 100% wrong as usual, end of story. 

There's no weird media-party conspiracy either. If you can't see that there's media bias that's your problem. No one else denies it. That's not even a thing. 

[WestCanMan]

On 12/25/2019 at 5:39 PM, Moonlight Graham said:

Not sure i agree.  The helicopter flight got some run in the media and the SNC Lavalin scandal got more run in the media than any of Harper's scandals, including Duffy.

Duffygate was making headline news on a lot of nights 3 years after the story broke. SNC isn't making headline news anymore and JWR was just kicked out of the Liberal Party this April. 

[Moonlight Graham]

3 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Duffygate was making headline news on a lot of nights 3 years after the story broke. SNC isn't making headline news anymore and JWR was just kicked out of the Liberal Party this April. 

His case went to trial, that's why it came up again 3 years later.

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Eyeball give it up. The Libs created the DPA law in question, you were 100% wrong as usual, end of story.

Yes the Liberals created the legislation that legalized DPA's in Canada after the Conservatives laid the foundation for bringing them to Canada in the first place. They are of like mind on the issue of DPA's.   You are too but you're stuck between the hard and stupid place you usually find yourself in - in this case having to look like you don't support Trudeau while supporting what he supports at the same time.

Quote

There's no weird media-party conspiracy either. If you can't see that there's media bias that's your problem. No one else denies it. That's not even a thing.

Of course there's bias in the media nobody said there wasn't.  All I'm saying is that the right wing's fear of it is so irrational, flaky and stupefying that it's morphed into a rabid full blown conspiracy theory that's on par with anti-vaxxing.  Speaking of which you and half the other conservative wing-nuts around here remind me of the way hard-boiled anti-vaxxers try to tone it down a little and refer to their paranoia as hesitancy instead.  You see the same thing with assholes who try to bring some respectability to their racism by referring to it as concern.

In the meantime how do you feel about having your tongue up the rear end of a President who truly believes the media-party and deep-state are one and the same very real thing?  You really don't think that reflects on you at all do you?  That's the power of bias for you.

[DrYouth]

On ‎12‎/‎21‎/‎2019 at 8:55 AM, Argus said:

Classical liberals, that is. The author makes a reasonable case that classical liberalism is basically today's conservatism minus the social conservatism.  Also that the Liberals are not the least bit liberal but are actually illiberal.

Seems to me that classical liberalism is now lost at the centre.... and generally overlooked.

"Progressives" have given up liberalism for their cult of egalitarianism, where individualism no longer counts for much. Individual liberties are to be sacrificed for identitarian causes... where victim status is what matters.

"Conservatism" is now conflated with a new nationalism and a position in opposition to the above progressive position... with the sole goal of burning this ideology down and slaughtering it's sacred cows.

Strange times we live in.

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, DrYouth said:

Seems to me that classical liberalism is now lost at the centre.... and generally overlooked.

"Progressives" have given up liberalism for their cult of egalitarianism, where individualism no longer counts for much. Individual liberties are to be sacrificed for identitarian causes... where victim status is what matters.

"Conservatism" is now conflated with a new nationalism and a position in opposition to the above progressive position... with the sole goal of burning this ideology down and slaughtering it's sacred cows.

Strange times we live in.

Agreed.  But Egalitarianism amounts to little more than moralistic statements, and doesn't constitute anything but a tiny bullet-point in overall policy.  And the new nationalism is somehow called 'globalism' which mishmashes multinational corps, new technology, international trade and anything that isn't traditional/familiar.

A reset is needed.  

[eyeball]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

Agreed.  But Egalitarianism amounts to little more than moralistic statements, and doesn't constitute anything but a tiny bullet-point in overall policy.  And the new nationalism is somehow called 'globalism' which mishmashes multinational corps, new technology, international trade and anything that isn't traditional/familiar.

A reset is needed.  

We need fewer identitarians and more definitionists - people who maintain that the original definitions are best. i.e. I'd restore the original definition of right and left wing so we can stop identifying with some stupid pendulum that swings back and forth like a wrecking ball.

Look more closely at the far more important relevant axis which runs up and down especially the top where the pendulum seems to swing from.

I'd like to ight that part of the structure up...with a laser beam.