Canada’s Conservatives

[jbg]

After years of having dithering, indecisive, indeed incomprehensible policies, Canada's finally taken a rightward, refreshing turn with the January 23, 2006 election of the Conservative Party, led by Stephen Harper. Indeed, Canada's fast returning to its role as a key member of the English-speaking world, which over the years has rescued the world from Nazism, Communism and other loopy forms of dictatorship.

The New York Sun (link) ran an excellent article, excerpted below, about this change.

==========================================================

Publication:The New York Sun; Date:Aug 25, 2006; Section:Editorial & Opinion; Page:9

Canada’s Conservatives

By ADAM DAIFALLAH

QUEBEC CITY — After years of inaction, in 2002 Canada’s Liberal government buckled to pressure and added Hezbollah to the national list of banned terrorist organizations. Since that time, few if any elected officials have mused about reopening the issue.

But this week, during a trip to Lebanon sponsored by a Canadian Arab group, a Liberal member of parliament named Borys Wrzesnewskyj proclaimed himself in favor of taking Hezbollah off the banned list. Digging himself a deeper hole, he went on to compare Hezbollah to the Irish Republican Army.

Poor Borys. Normally, the fatuous musings of a relatively unknown legislator wouldn’t garner much attention, even in the tiny world of Canadian politics. Unfortunately for Mr. Wrzesnewskyj, he was a victim of bad timing.

*snip*

But the move has reaped some benefits for him and his party that may have long-lasting consequences.

First, the Conservatives’ pro-Israel stance has won plaudits from Jewish groups and earned converts from high-level, influential Jewish Liberals. One of the Liberals’ bestknown and wealthiest members, Heather Reisman, announced she has joined the Conservatives after a being a lifelong Liberal activist, as has Robert Lantos, a well-known Canadian film director.

*snip*

This incident and the fallout from it have put the spotlight on a schism at the heart of the Liberal Party that has been quietly playing out for years — an internal squabble that puts into question whether the most electorally successful political party in North America can continue being home to large numbers of both Jewish and Muslim voters.

During its 13 years in power, the Liberal government rarely took sides on matters involving Israel.The rule of thumb at United Nations was to abstain on Israel-related votes. Since the Conservatives took over, however, Canada has been siding more often with the Jewish state. And in this latest war, Prime Minister Harper has lined up squarely behind Israel — even calling Israel’s response to Hezbollah “measured.” A key Conservative member of parliament this week compared Hezbollah to the Nazis.

*snip*

But the move has reaped some benefits for him and his party that may have long-lasting consequences.

*snip*

As with most political parties out of power, the Liberals are experiencing some nasty infighting. They are also uncharacteristically airing their dirty laundry in public, thanks also to some subtle goading from the Conservatives. But the root problem here is more serious: the Liberals are basically a catch-all, unideological party and will not take clear-cut stands on issues.They have both anti- and pro-Israel factions to appease at once, a chore proving more and more impossible to achieve.

Since the Conservative Party came to power in January, Canada has undergone a virtual revolution in its handling of foreign affairs. For the first time anyone can remember, Canada is taking clear, principled positions on important international issues, especially relating to the War on Terror.This new reality is a welcome development in its own right. If it forces the Liberals to confront their own incoherence on the Israel-Hezbollah war, so much the better. (empahsis supplied).

Mr. Daifallah, a former Washington correspondent of The New York Sun, is a Canadian author and journalist.

[August1991]

Deleted.

[jdobbin]

After years of having dithering, indecisive, indeed incomprehensible policies, Canada's finally taken a rightward, refreshing turn with the January 23, 2006 election of the Conservative Party, led by Stephen Harper. Indeed, Canada's fast returning to its role as a key member of the English-speaking world, which over the years has rescued the world from Nazism, Communism and other loopy forms of dictatorship.

This is just an advertisement for someone who remains a Conservative party member. It isn't a journalism piece.

[Hicksey]

After years of having dithering, indecisive, indeed incomprehensible policies, Canada's finally taken a rightward, refreshing turn with the January 23, 2006 election of the Conservative Party, led by Stephen Harper. Indeed, Canada's fast returning to its role as a key member of the English-speaking world, which over the years has rescued the world from Nazism, Communism and other loopy forms of dictatorship.

This is just an advertisement for someone remains a Conservative party member. It isn't a journalism piece.

I vote for the CPC, but I hate when people give credit not deserved to those they support. Who is going to take them to account when they mess up if their own supporters will not? The other parties do not want them to succeed at the things you voted for.

So I ask, what has Harper done to the end of Canada returning to its role as a "key member of the English-speaking world, which over the years has rescued the world from Nazism, Communism and other loopy forms of dictatorship" other than agree with the US? Harper wasn't even the one who sent the troops to Afghanistan, the Liberals did that. Sure, he left them there after their role exceeded their usual one of social workers to the downtrodden, but beyond that name one thing ... please.

[jbg]

After years of having dithering, indecisive, indeed incomprehensible policies, Canada's finally taken a rightward, refreshing turn with the January 23, 2006 election of the Conservative Party, led by Stephen Harper. Indeed, Canada's fast returning to its role as a key member of the English-speaking world, which over the years has rescued the world from Nazism, Communism and other loopy forms of dictatorship.

This is just an advertisement for someone remains a Conservative party member. It isn't a journalism piece.

I quoted a journalist. I never said I was a journalist. I am a lawyer, expressing an opinion on wonderful developments in your country. Having a country more like Australia than like Jamaica or France on our border would be a good thing.

[jdobbin]

I quoted a journalist. I never said I was a journalist. I am a lawyer, expressing an opinion on wonderful developments in your country. Having a country more like Australia than like Jamaica or France on our border would be a good thing.

I am saying that the guy you think is a journalist isn't one.

[jbg]

I vote for the CPC, but I hate when people give credit not deserved to those they support. Who is going to take them to account when they mess up if their own supporters will not? The other parties do not want them to succeed at the things you voted for.

Harper's changed the style from one of creating a fog when the PM talks to talking in plain, simple Canadian (err, French or Canadian).

So I ask, what has Harper done to the end of Canada returning to its role as a "key member of the English-speaking world, which over the years has rescued the world from Nazism, Communism and other loopy forms of dictatorship" other than agree with the US? Harper wasn't even the one who sent the troops to Afghanistan, the Liberals did that. Sure, he left them there after their role exceeded their usual one of social workers to the downtrodden, but beyond that name one thing ... please.

He actually came out in favor of de-funding the Palestinian Authority ahead of Bush. That's an accomplishment. Most importantly, he's changed the focus of Canada's foreign policy from supporting the "Francophonie" nations to supporting Bush, Blair and Howard. Much more the old WW II alliance.

Since in some cases he's out ahead of the US, I wouldn't call it merely "agree(ing) with the US".

[Hicksey]

I vote for the CPC, but I hate when people give credit not deserved to those they support. Who is going to take them to account when they mess up if their own supporters will not? The other parties do not want them to succeed at the things you voted for.

Harper's changed the style from one of creating a fog when the PM talks to talking in plain, simple Canadian (err, French or Canadian).

He's a politician. We'll always have to read between the lines to see what he really means. But point made. Martin's retarded 'exclusionist' rhetoric was much more annoying and embarassing.

So I ask, what has Harper done to the end of Canada returning to its role as a "key member of the English-speaking world, which over the years has rescued the world from Nazism, Communism and other loopy forms of dictatorship" other than agree with the US? Harper wasn't even the one who sent the troops to Afghanistan, the Liberals did that. Sure, he left them there after their role exceeded their usual one of social workers to the downtrodden, but beyond that name one thing ... please.

He actually came out in favor of de-funding the Palestinian Authority ahead of Bush. That's an accomplishment. Most importantly, he's changed the focus of Canada's foreign policy from supporting the "Francophonie" nations to supporting Bush, Blair and Howard. Much more the old WW II alliance.

Since in some cases he's out ahead of the US, I wouldn't call it merely "agree(ing) with the US".

I can give him credit for doing that, but in essence its something we never should have done in the first place. He corrected a wrong. He didn't actually do anything new.

I like that they agree with those I consider the righteous in the fight against terrorism. But again, aside from that Harper hasn't actually done anything other than leave soldiers where they are. Harper has not intiated anything to the end that we speak of.

That's what I mean. If he wants to be out there contributing he has to be an initiator, and a follower instead of a glorified mouthpiece. He's nothing more than the kid that echoes the bully on the school yard. Its nice he thinks they're doing the right thing. Why doesn't he do something to help out? When he does something worthy of the UK and US following then he'll deserve credit.

[jbg]

That's what I mean. If he wants to be out there contributing he has to be an initiator, and a follower instead of a glorified mouthpiece. He's nothing more than the kid that echoes the bully on the school yard. Its nice he thinks they're doing the right thing. Why doesn't he do something to help out? When he does something worthy of the UK and US following then he'll deserve credit.

Do I detect a bit of envy of and/or hatred of the United States? What country has a better neighbor than Canada? And I don't mean Denmark (Greenland) up by Nunavut.

[Hicksey]

That's what I mean. If he wants to be out there contributing he has to be an initiator, and a follower instead of a glorified mouthpiece. He's nothing more than the kid that echoes the bully on the school yard. Its nice he thinks they're doing the right thing. Why doesn't he do something to help out? When he does something worthy of the UK and US following then he'll deserve credit.

Do I detect a bit of envy of and/or hatred of the United States? What country has a better neighbor than Canada? And I don't mean Denmark (Greenland) up by Nunavut.

Not at all. I think they are doing the right thing. I think we ought to be more than a fairweather friend to them. And considering the political climate here and large scale disdain for our neighbor to the south, if Harper wants to be re-elected thats what he has to be.

I just wish we had a leader and a citizenry that had the courage to be a world leader too. Instead we have to aspire just to be a follower. I guess that in the sense of our presence and importance on the world stage I am a bit envious.

[WestViking]

The notion that anyone who agrees with or supports a position that Bush has taken is wrong is not supportable or sustainable. Simply because Bush has taken a position does not make that position wrong. Simply because someone reaches the same conclusion does not indicate that person is a Bush supporter.

The mindless blather gets tiresome.

Making a statement does not make the assumptions therein correct; it simply indicates that the proponent (author, speaker) is unwilling to apply independent analysis and thought, choosing to repeat the incorrect assumptions of others and assumes that everyone else suffers the same lack of initiative.

[jbg]

Making a statement does not make the assumptions therein correct; it simply indicates that the proponent (author, speaker) is unwilling to apply independent analysis and thought, choosing to repeat the incorrect assumptions of others and assumes that everyone else suffers the same lack of initiative.

I've noticed, over the years, that many (though certainly not all) Canadian posters, and mostly those on the left, instinctively will take an anti-American position. Those same people will accuse supporters of America (Mulroney, Harper, other Canadians) of being cowed by the "neighborhood bully". Nazi Germany was such a bully; the US, signally, is not.

[daddyhominum]

[

I've noticed, over the years, that many (though certainly not all) Canadian posters, and mostly those on the left, instinctively will take an anti-American position. Those same people will accuse supporters of America (Mulroney, Harper, other Canadians) of being cowed by the "neighborhood bully". Nazi Germany was such a bully; the US, signally, is not.

I expect that you err in ascribing a political position to anti-Americanism. While it is not a great problem in Canada, you would find that many Conservatives in our history were "anti-American". Perhaps John A., the founding Prime Minister, most notably among them.

But on the matter of whether the USA bullies Canada, don't you think that the recent battle over the application of NAFTA to softwood trade was an instance of US bullying ? After all, the decisions by all the various appeal processes were overwhelmingly in favor of Canada's position and yet Canada had to agree to make an arrangement outside the NAFTA to maintain trade. I don't see how the stubborn refusal by the US to abide by the agreements they had signed and the imposition of unfair tariffs could be anything other then bullying.

Perhaps sometimes bullying is just good business ?

[jdobbin]

I quoted a journalist. I never said I was a journalist. I am a lawyer, expressing an opinion on wonderful developments in your country. Having a country more like Australia than like Jamaica or France on our border would be a good thing.

I am saying that the guy you think is a journalist isn't one.

I forgot to ask. How is Australia a better ally than Canada is aside from Iraq?

[Argus]

I quoted a journalist. I never said I was a journalist. I am a lawyer, expressing an opinion on wonderful developments in your country. Having a country more like Australia than like Jamaica or France on our border would be a good thing.

I am saying that the guy you think is a journalist isn't one.

I forgot to ask. How is Australia a better ally than Canada is aside from Iraq?

Well, it has been supporing the US diplomatically, as well as in the media. And it has been putting out regional fires so the US doesn't have to worry about them, as in Solomon Islands and East Timor.

[Riverwind]

I forgot to ask. How is Australia a better ally than Canada is aside from Iraq?

American bashing is not the national sport in Australia.

[jdobbin]

American bashing is not the national sport in Australia.

Really. They've had huge anti-American rallies there compared to Canada. And ask any Australians what they think of the U.S. and you'll get an earful.

[jdobbin]

Well, it has been supporing the US diplomatically, as well as in the media. And it has been putting out regional fires so the US doesn't have to worry about them, as in Solomon Islands and East Timor.

And did Canada not support the U.S. diplomatically aside from not going to Iraq?

As for regional fires, Canada has been in Haiti so the U.S. didn't have to be there.

Sorry, I just don't see it.

[jbg]

Well, it has been supporing the US diplomatically, as well as in the media. And it has been putting out regional fires so the US doesn't have to worry about them, as in Solomon Islands and East Timor.

Thanks. Basically, that's what I was going to answer.

[jdobbin]

Thanks. Basically, that's what I was going to answer.

Canada supported the U.S. in the United Nations in Iraq. Unlike other nations, Canada didn't vote against the U.S. We just didn't send troops. In the end, that was probably the right strategy.

One of the first countries on the ground giving aid last year for Katrina was Canada. On some U.S. conservative radio stations we were accused of helping to embarrass the U.S. That sounds like anti-Canada talk, doesn't it?

[gerryhatrick]

Oh yeah!! It's SO REFRESHING after watching it for the last SIX YEARS IN THE USA!!

[jbg]

Oh yeah!! It's SO REFRESHING after watching it for the last SIX YEARS IN THE USA!!

How surprising? Another attack on Harper and/or Bush from you. Who'd have thunk it?

[Hicksey]

That's what I mean. If he wants to be out there contributing he has to be an initiator, and a follower instead of a glorified mouthpiece. He's nothing more than the kid that echoes the bully on the school yard. Its nice he thinks they're doing the right thing. Why doesn't he do something to help out? When he does something worthy of the UK and US following then he'll deserve credit.

Do I detect a bit of envy of and/or hatred of the United States? What country has a better neighbor than Canada? And I don't mean Denmark (Greenland) up by Nunavut.

Not at all. I think they are doing the right thing. I think we ought to be more than a fairweather friend to them. And considering the political climate here and large scale disdain for our neighbor to the south, if Harper wants to be re-elected thats what he has to be.

I just wish we had a leader and a citizenry that had the courage to be a world leader too. Instead we have to aspire just to be a follower. I guess that in the sense of our presence and importance on the world stage I am a bit envious.

I just read this and wanted to elaborate further on this.

Just because I want a leader who wants to be a leader not only in policy suggestions, but also in taking action where needed, doesn't mean I want that leader just following the US and UK into battle around the globe. But if one of these terrorist threats gets through, they hit our country and it is found to be largely sponsored by the ruling leaders of a country, and carried out by the minions of the ruling party(like 9/11), I expect our troops on the ground and fighters in the air without asking permission. I'd expect Harper to tell Bush to cover our troops in Afghanistan because we've got a war to fight and we're sending those troops to fight it. I just don't see that happening today, even with the US as an ally. Bush would want to act the big brother standing at our back instead. I'd expect Harper to tell him no, and that after such an event that not only do we expect to lead the way, we'd also have earned it. I don't think Harper's spine is that strong.

I want a leader that wants to do more than run off at the mouth every time something happens in the world. If we want to be leaders in the world, we cannot be back seat drivers. Standing here and acting the all-talk, no-walk elitist is worse than just staying quiet IMO.

[jdobbin]

For some people who thought that American people would think of Canada as a bigger ally with Conservatives in power.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_po...dex.asp?PID=687

Canada is still number 2.

[Hicksey]

For some people who thought that American people would think of Canada as a bigger ally with Conservatives in power.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_po...dex.asp?PID=687

Canada is still number 2.

Well ... duh.

Anyone with the notion that we could be viewed as more of an ally to the US (regardless of who is in power) than the UK is dreaming.

I'm just glad to be a scintilla more than a fairweather friend which is what we were under Liberal rule.